A history of political theories from Luther to Montesquieu

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Preface

This volume carries forward to the middle of the eighteenth century the work begun in the History of Political Theories^ Ancient and Medicsval, published three years ago. Save for slight modifications to meet the special requirements of the modem period, the scope and method announced in the earlier volume have been adhered to. In connection with the present work the author desires to make grateful acknowledgment to his colleagues, Professors Herbert L. Osgood and James H. Robinson, for useful suggestions on particular parts of the manuscript which they have read ; to Mr. Francis W. Coker, University Fellow in Political Philosophy at Columbia, for verification of references and bibliography; and especially to Professor C. E. Merriam, of the University of Chicago, who has read the proofs of the entire volume and has rendered inestimable service by his sound critical judgment and his accurate scholarship.

Lake Sunapeb, N.H.

July 4, 1905.

140790

CHAPTER I The Rkpormation PAOS

1. General Character of the Protestant Reformation ... 1

2. Martin Luther 7

8. Melanchthon 14

4. Zwingli 23

5. John Calvin 26

6. Sommaiy 83

CHAPTER n Anti-monarchic Doctrines in the Sixteenth Century

1. The Religious Wars ^89

2. The VindicuB contra TyrannoM .46

3. George Buchanan 56

4. Johannes Althusius 61

6. General Influence of the Anti-monarchic Theories . . 76 References 80

CHAPTER m Jean Bodin:

1. Method and First Principles of his Politics .... 81

2. Origin and Social Basis of the State 87

8. Citizenship 98

4. The Theory of Sovereignty . • 96

6. Forms of State and Grovemment 103

6. Theory of Revolutions 108

7. Principles of Grovemment and Administration . . .114

8. Bodin's Place in the History of Political Theories . 120 References 123

vii

Viii CONTENTS

CHAPTER IV Catholic Controversiausts akd Jurists

PAOS

-1. The Catholic Reformation 124

2. Bellarmin and Barclay 128

3. Spanish Jurists and Moralists 132

~ 4. Suarez on Law 135

- 5. Suarez on Government 142

6. Campanella 149

CHAPTER V i^HuGO Grotius

1. Protestant Precursors of Grotius . . . . .153

2. The General Conditions of his Work 157

3. The Law of Nature 164

4. The Law of Nations . / ItT

5. Theory of the State and of Sovereignty 179

6. The Place of Grotius in the History of Political Theory . 187 References 191

CHAPTER VI

/ English Political Philosophy before the Puritan

Revolution

1. Development of the Constitution 192

2. The Common Law 197

3. Sir John Fortescue . . >* 201

4. The Tudor Century : More ; Hooker 205

5. James I and his Contemporaries 212

I

-, CHAPTER Vn

^ Theories of the Puritan Revolution

1. Political Doctrine of the Parliament Party . . . .219

2. Ecclesiastical Doctrine of the Parliament Party . 223

3. The Development of Independency 229

4. Political Theory of the Commonwealth 234 f:

CONTENTS ix

PAOS

5. The Political Ideas of Milton 241

6. The Theories of Harrington 248

7. Anti-republican Doctrine : Filmer 254

CHAPTER Vin

Thomas HobbeS/ ^

1. Character and Method of his Philosophy .... 263 J""-:

2. The State of Nature 268^-- .

8. Natural Rights and Natural Law 272

4. The Origin of the Commonwealth 276

5. Sovereignty and Liberty . 281

6. Government and Law 290

7. State and Church 296

8. Hobbes's Phu» in the History of Political Theory . . . 800 References 804

CHAPTER IX Continental Theory during the Age of Louis XIV

General Condition of Continental Politics .... 805

2. Spinoza 809

3. Pufendorf 818

5. Minor Currents in Continental Theory 831

CHAPTER X John Locke

1. Practical Politics of the English Revolution .... 335

2. Relation of Locke to Contemporary Theory and Practice . 340 8. The State of Nature and Natural Rights .... 845

4. The Social Contract 849

5. Grovernment : Separation of Powers 354

6. The Right of Revolution 859

7. Locke's Place in the History of Political Theory . . . 863 References 868

X CONTENTS

CHAPTER XI From Locke to Moktesquieu

PAOB

1. Intellectual and Political Conditions 869

2. German Theories : Wolff ; Frederick the Great . . • 874 8. British Theory : Bolingbroke and Hume .... 877 4. Italian Theory : Yico 884

CHAPTER Xn Montesquieu ;

1. Greneral Conditions of his Work 891

2. Method and First Principles 894

8. Forms of Government according to Nature and Principle . 899

4. Transformation of Govemments 406

6. Theories of Liberty and Slavery 409

6. Theory of Climate and Physical Environment . . 418

7. Social, Economic, and Religious Policy 422

8. Summary and Conclusion 428

BlBLIOORAPHT 485

Index 449

A HISTORY OF POLITICAL THEORIES

FROM LUTHER TO MONTESQUIEU

CHAPTER I

THE REFORMATION

1. Oeneral Charaoter of the Protestant Reformation-

In the sixteenth century political theory, like all other phases of intellectual activity, was dominated by the influences of the great Protestant revolt. Primarily the Reformation, as a philosophical phenomenon, was theologicaT in character. It was concerned with the relations of man to God and with the ways and means by which men were to be assured of eternal happiness in the world to come. As the issue was made up at the outset by Luther, it consisted essentially in the relative importance of faith and of works as a means of justification ; that is, in the question whether the saving grace of God was manifested chiefly by the inward spuitual transformation of the individual, or rather by conformity to the prescriptions which the church declared essential to sanctity.

The controversies that developed out of this question soon brought into the foreground the ecclesiastical phase of the reforming movement. Condemned by the recognized authorities of the church, the Re-

TOL. II. — B 1 formers challenged the right of those authorities to decide the question, and raised the issue as to the nature and constitution of the Christian church. The ancient authority of the Roman See was flatly repudiated ; but further than that, not even a general council was recognized as qualified to give final decisions on questions of faith or worship, and the bonds of ecclesiastical organization and discipline were wholly dissolved by the doctrine that the individual conscience, interpreting the word of God in the Scriptures, was the sole and conclusive criterion of Christian duty.

Finally, the demoralizing and atomistic tendencies that were manifestly involved in this latter dogma found a corrective in the ethical element which was conspicuous throughout the philosophy of the Beformers. That a rigid observance of the rules of common morality as prescribed in the Decalogue was essential to a Christian life, was a cardinal feature of all the new teaching. .Whereas the old church had tended to put the emphasis on the penance for sin after it was committed, the Reformers laid the stress on not committing it. The whole attitude of the Reformers in this respect made for social betterment, and was responsible for that reunion of morality with religion which has characterized both the Catholic and the Protestant churches ever since the separation.

While the theory of the Reformation thus embraced only theological, ecclesiastical and ethical elements, its practical application involved questions of most far-reaching political and social import. As the doc-

THE PB0TE8TANT REFORMATION 8

trine of the Refonners was developed and spread over Europe, the secular govemments took but languid interest in the theological phase of the movement; but when the matter of renouncing the authority of the Pope came up, there was no lack of concern. Two questions had to be settled in every country which adopted the Reform: (1) What disposition should be made of the ecclesiastical property, revenues and jurisdiction in which, under the old system, the Roman See had had so substantial an interest ? and (2) What limit, if any, should be set to the variations in creed and worship which, on the principle of individual interpretation of the Scriptures, were assuming fantastic and revolutionary forms ? The first of these questions the government generally answered by appropriating to itself a large part of the property and jurisdiction, and assigning the remainder to an ecclesiastical organization which was substantially a dependency of the secular authorities. Henry VIII of England, as is well known, effected the ecclesiastical severance from Rome without any formal deviation from theological unity, and under the influence of motives that were quite devoid of religious or moral quality. Nor can it be doubted that the German and other princes who supported the Reformation were actuated at least as much by the prospect of enhancing their own power and dignity as by any profound conviction of the abstract righteousness of the Reformers' doctrine. The ground had been prepared for the separation from Rome by the long-standing abuses of papal patronage and jurisdiction, and the now inveterate consciousness among the peoples of the North that they were being financially exploited by an Italian potentate whose policy was largely secular.

As to the second question, it had early to be admitted by the Reformers themselves that some line must be drawn beyond which the vagaries of private V judgment in interpreting the Scriptures must not be tolerated. The beginning of the Lutheran movement was quickly followed by the appearance of many Reformers who found in the Word of God doctrines that were subversive of the ancient social and political order, as well as of the ancient ecclesiastical system. From the theory of baptism which was preached by some of these sectaries the term " Anabaptist " came to be applied generically to all of them. These were the radicals of the Reformation, and the various shades of extravagance which prevailed among them — each firmly grounded by its votaries on the Bible — included such extremes as are suggested to-day by the names of Quakers and Anarchists, with all the forms of socialism, communism and other heresy that lie between. Against these extremists the leaders of the Reform felt called upon to take a decided position, and denunciation of Anabaptist doctrine is conspicuous throughout the works of Luther, Zwingli and Calvin. In 1524-1525 a serious insurrection of the peasants in southern and central Germany was attended by demonstrations by Anabaptist agitators, and was the subject of a violent diatribe by Luther against the insurgents.

THE REFORMERS AND THE PRINCES 5

Ten years later an especially savage outbreak of f^iaticism in Munster, Westphalia, revealed the full barbarism to which the triumph of the extremists would lead. It was the merest matter of self-preservation that the moderate Reformers should absolutely dissociate their movement from these sectaries ; hence support of the established political power in all that did not imply recognition of the Papacy was the uniform practice of the leaders. This strict alliance for common defence between the governments, enjoying the spoils of the old church, and the Reformers, preaching a non-political life, is one of the characteristic features of the earliest period of the Reformation. An obvious practical consequence was the further exaltation of the power and dignity of the secular governments and particularly of the monarchs. The Reformation clearly promoted, in the first half of the sixteenth century, the development of absolute monarchy.

The middle of this century marks fairly well the end of the first stage in the religious transformation of Europe. By that time the Lutheran phase of the movement had achieved its most distinctive work, and the Calvinistic phase was about to assume the greatest prominence. The geographical limits of the secession from Rome were pretty definitely determined. In Germany Charles V, after long subordinating the matter to the interests of his policy against France and the Turks, had finally assumed the defence of the old order in religion, and proceeded to the subjugation of the Protestants. He was beaten, however^ though more on political than on religious grounds; and by the Religious Peace of Augsbiu^g, in 1555, the Lutheran princes were secured in the right to maintain within their dominions the creed of their choice. Northern Germany, roughly speaking, thus became constitutionally Protestant. The Scandinavian states had already assumed formally that character. Western and southwestern Germany was strongly Reformed and Calvinistic in faith, but this creed was not recognized in the Peace of Augsburg, and hence had no sanction in the law of the Empire. A considerable part of Switzerland was thoroughly Zwinglian, while the Reformed doctrine had a strong hold on France and the Netherlands, though lacking in either the recognition of the law. In England the reign of Edward VI (1547-1553) gave formal effect to the Protestant doctrine which Henry VIII had never tolerated, but which was clearly acceptable to the most influential elements of the population ; and in Scotland, finally, it was in 1555 that John Knox, fresh from his training under Calvin at Geneva, began that energetic propaganda which soon enabled the hitherto halting and timid Scottish Reformers to make their country a mainstay of Presbyterianism. The remainder of Europe was secure from serious Protestant influence, and the Papacy had by the middle of the sixteenth century entered upon the policy of reform and aggression by which it put an end to the further sweep of Protestantism. The Council of Trent, in a checkered career beginning in 1545, had put dogma and worship upon much firmer

LUTHEB'S POLITICAL DOCTRINES 7

grounds than ever before; the Jesuits had entered upon their efficient and energetic career; and thus the Catholic Reformation had been definitely begun. With the forces of the old order and the new in fairly equal combat, the relation of the theories of the religious parties to politics gradually changed: ^whereas in the first stage of the movement the Reformers' doctrines were subsidiary to practical ' and theoretical politics, in the later stage they assumed the controlling part. But before considering this situation, let us examine the attitude of the great men who inaugurated the Reform.)

2. Martin Luther

But two doctrines of political significance are unmistakably derivable from Luther's voluminous writings : (first, the absolute distinction in kind between spiritual and secular interests and authority ; * and second, the Christian duty of passive submission to the established social and political order.^ And even these two are at times fluctuating and obscure in the shiftings of the Reformer's policy. For Luther's part in the movement which made him famous was that of an agitator rather than a philosopher. He was, at the inception of the movement, as far as possible from any large and coherent project of even theological reconstruction. The correction of a few obvious abuses was the limit of his ambition at Wittenberg, and there are abundant evidences of his profound astonishment at the magnitude of the obstacles which gradually appeared in his way. It was in surmounting these obstacles that his characteristics as an agitator became manifest — brutelike vigor and much resourcefulness in controversy, and a profound susceptibility to the currents of popular feeling in his German environment.

The denial of the supremacy of the Pope in the church was no part of his early contention;^ but when the papal legates tried to browbeat him into unquestioning submission, and Rome at last issued its condemnatory bull and made him a heretic, he took up with all zeal the denunciation of the Petrine dogma. Every form of attack on the theoretical and historical supports of the Papacy that had been employed by Marsiglio and Ockam was pressed by Luther with his customary vehemence, and at the door of the Roman church L laid the «spon«bmty for not only a highJianded usurpation ortemporal power and prestige, but also a gross perversion of doctrine and ceremonial. He demanded a radical reform of the whole system, based on the abolition of all the most characteristic features of the medisBval organization and practice, and a recurrence to the ideas and institutions of patristic Christianity. The instrument which he proposed for accomphshing this reform was a general council ; but the whole tenor

^ See his Resolutio de Potestate Papce (Opera Latina, Vol. XXXIV, p. 206). In this he concedes that the Pope is de facto the head of the church and must be recognized as such; but he denies that this primacy is Scriptural or of divine right, and he vehemently assails the extreme pretensions set up for the Papacy in the Canon law. The offensive decretals he ascribes, not to the Popes themselves, but to their courtiers ; e.g. ** Innocentius UI sive familiaris eius scriba ; " ** notarius PapsB ; " << is scriptoroulus Romanus."

LUTH£R*S DEMANDS FOB BEFORM 9

of the powerful pamphlet in which he most distinctly formulated his demand, To ike Christian NohUity of the Oerman Nation^ shows that his purpose was to find a sure support in German national sentiment as against the Italians, and that he looked to action by the German governments for the success of the movement he had in mind. The twenty-seven points in which he summarizes the reforms that must be effected " by secular power or general council " include the abolition of practically all the revenues and all the jurisdiction of the Pope in regions outside the estates of the Roman church, and the recognition and enforcement of the principle that whatever involves money, estate or any material « interest shall be left to the secular authorities.* In the faith and charity that are the essence of Christianity he holds that all Christians are equal. Pope and bishop and priest are merely officers for the regulation and promotion of Christian living,' and their duties in no way involve exceptional relations to the political order. As Luther reflected upon this conception, the whole system of the mediaeval church took in his mind the form of a deliberately devised and craftily executed project for the acquisition of wealth and political power by the papal court. The Canon law, with which his adversaries confronted

him at every turn, he regarded as merely the body of doctrine in which the conspirators had given their project a legal form, and had shamelessly confounded things material with things divine. As an essential feature of the return to the true system he demanded, therefore, the total repudiation of the Canon law, with all the authority and jurisdiction based upon it.^

Luther did not, however, deny the necessity of some system of discipline for the maintenance of the true order in worship and belief. But he was never as successful in construction as he was in destruction. Though the idea that religious life was to be regulated by means that were purely spiritual was sedulously adhered to, the practical outcome of the distinctively Lutheran reform was the appropriation by the secular authorities of much of that paramount influence in ecclesiastical affairs which was taken away from the Papacy. The tendency in this direction received strong confirmation from the emphasis with which Luther asserted the duty of passive obedience.

This second clear element in Luther's political creed is particularly apparent in his conception of the divine character of secular government, and in his attitude toward the rebellious peasants and the fanatical Anabaptists. The definitive breach with

^ His twenty-fifth point in the address to the Christian nobility is that the universities need **eine guten starken Reformation/' one element of which is that the study of the Canon law shall be ** zu Grunde ausgetilgt" The importance he attached to this matter was particularly expressed in burning a copy of the Canon law together with the Pope's bull of excommunication. C/. Kdstlin, Martin Luther, Vol. I, p. 405.

LUTHEB ON PASSIVE OBEDIENCE 11

Rome and the anathema against Luther for heresy soon brought up the practical question as to the duty of the numerous adherents of his doctrine in states whose princes undertook to enforce the Pope's decree. In 1523 this subject was treated by Luther in his work entitled, Of Secular Authority : How far is Obedience due toitf^

The doctrine of this work is based by Luther exclusively on the Bible, and is that of the church fathers, sharpened by something of that contempt for secular rulers that was manifested by their papal adversaries in the Middle Ages. Secular power, he holds, is sanctioned by God. It is necessary because the great majority of mankind are not Christians. For Christians the guidance of the Holy Spirit is all that is required ; but for those that lack this guidance the sword of the secular ruler is necessary in order that external peace and order may exist. Submission [/ to civil government is directly enjoined upon Christians by the Scriptures,* and the basis for this injunction is, not that Christians need such government for themselves, but that they must do what is for the good of others. This altruistic principle is very ingeniously adapted to the support of Luther's view that the duty of the Christian subject extends to bearing arms for his sovereign. On this point the argu-

^ Von weltlicher Oberkeit, wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig set, Luther's Werke (Weimar), VoL XI, p. 245.

' Luther depends upon the texts which had been employed throughout the Middle Ages, but laid especial stress upon Gen. ix, 6 : *< Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed," as expressing the divine sanction of governmental power.

ment labors a little in dealing with the non-militant spirit of the New Testament, but he falls back on the doctrine that while the Christian may not draw the sword for himself, he must do so for the good of others, and must contribute his share to restrain wickedness and protect the reign of righteousness. The duty of the Christian subject to obey his prince or to fight for him ceases, however, when the prince is manifestly in the wrong ; but it holds good in all cases of doubt as to the right or wrong of the cause.^ As to the power of the civil government over matters of belief, Luther, interested primarily in the persecution of his followers, takes strong ground against any extension of secular power into the field. Only what is corporeal and outward can be affected by the laws of the state ; a legal injunction to believe so and so is folly. Belief can be determined or affected only by persuasion and by the secret power of God. Hence heresy cannot be extirpated by sword or fire or water j such means only confirm it. The prevailing system precisely inverts the true fimctions of prince and bishop. The bishops neglect their duties as teachers and call upon the princes to root out heresy; while the princes leave the punishment of usury, murder and theft to the bishops and waste their time in seeking to preserve the faith. " They rule the souls with the sword and the body with words ; secular princes govern as spiritual, and spir-

^ Where the case is doubtful, it must be regarded as subject to the secret will of God, who for his own purposes relieves the faithful of responsibility.

LUTHER ON 8ECULAB RULERS 13

itual princes as secular." But nothing better could be expected under the most prevalent political conditions; for, Luther roundly declares, princes are usually "the biggest fools or the worst knaves on earth." ^ Their function is merely that of jailers and hangmen for God, whose majesty requires that even the meanest of his servants shall be high-born and wealthy. A wise prince or a pious prince is a miracle, and attests the most exceptional favour of God.^

These contemptuous opinions of the holders of political power in no way qualified Luther's conten- . tion that the duty of the subjects was obedience. On j this ground he based his fierce denunciation of the peasants who rose against their lords in western Germany ; and this, together with his doctrine that secular government was divinely established, animated his fervour against the Anabaptists when they sought to carry out into practice his own idea that Christians did not need any human regulating control. The proceedings of these fanatics put to the severest test Luther's principles as to the treatment of heresy, and forced him to recognize that practically the civil^ authorities must fix a limit of toleration for subvert ' sive religious beliefs, and must use force when the limit is passed.

' It is hardly surprising that these opinions were made the basis of demands from the Saxon Duke Greorge that Luther be disciplined. Kostlin, I, 681.

As time went on, the trend of things in Germany toward a definite rupture between the Emperor and the Protestant princes caused Luther to weaken at last in his doctrine of passive obedience, fie said that the issue between princes and Emperor was largely one of constitutional law, where the jurists could decide better than the theologians ; but at the same time he set up, tentatively and with obvious hesitation, the plea that, as to purely temporal matters, self-defence was the right of a Christian, and particularly so in case of tyranny. Martyrdom had been a Christian duty under Diocletian ; but Charles y was not an absolute monarch like Diocletian, and hence the time for martyrdom was past : ^ if the laws that bind the Emperor are disregarded by him, sub- . mission is no longer a duty of his subjects. In these modifications of the earlier Lutheran teaching there is the germ of the theory which ultimately dominated all the Protestants and the Catholics as well, and determined the course of political philosophy during the long period of religious wars.

3. Melanchthon

Philip Melanchthon, the young disciple whom Luther loved, was of a wholly different intellectual make-up from his master. Luther was the rough, aggressive, fearless German, who never got far away from the mental habit of the mediaeval monk ; Melanchthon was refined, conciliatory and timid, and deeply imbued with that humanistic spirit which was at war

^ TabU Talk, trans, by Hazlitt, sec. 82d, p. 333.

MELANCHTHON 15

with everything medisBval in northern Europe. The classical learning of Melanchthon was most extensive and his Latin style was a marvel of lucidity and grace.^ Luther, in assailing the theology of the Romanists, included in the sweep of his denunciation the whole Aristotelian philosophy which had become so closely associated with that theology; Melanchthon, on the contrary, recurred with admiration and confidence to Aristotle's ethics and politics, and drew largely from them in formukting a system that should be suitable to the Reformed faith. But though Melanchthon was moderate and scholarly in his disposition and method, and well adapted to the task of furnishing the Reformation with a philosophy, nevertheless, his writings, like Luther's, exhibit the vacillation and incoherence that were inevitable in the stress of ecclesiastical revolution. For example, . the right of the secular authorities over matters of ' faith and worship, and the duty of subjects to obey . their lords, assume different aspects according as his discussion concerns primarily CathoUc princes and Protestant subjects, or Protestant princes and Catholic subjects. But apart from such topics, which were inseparably associated with current controversies, Melanchthon sought with some success to construct a general system of moral and political philosophy that should be of universal validity. In this task he was true to Luther's spirit in taking the Scriptures

^ Luther's judgment on Melanchthon and others is reported to have been as follows : " Res et verba Philippus [Melanchthon] ; verba sine re Erasmus ; res sine verbis Lutherus ; nee res nee verba Carolostadius." — Table Talk^ sec. 846.

1 as his starting-point ; but his method and much of vhis doctrine kept him close in the line of the Scho- .jlastics, and he employed with intelligence and discrimination even the Canon law, which Luther so vehemently proscribed.^

Melanchthon's system is based on the concept of natural right {im naturce) or, what is the same thing from a different point of view, natural law {lex natur J rce). This law consists in the perception which God has implanted in the human mind of the practical principles concerning, first, the existence of God himself and the obedience due to him ; and second, the civil institutions which promote his glory.* The precepts of natural law are summarized in the Decalogue, of which the first table {i.e. the first four commandments) determines man's duty toward God, and the second table (the last six commandments) his duty toward his fellow-man. Whatever institutions may be logically based on the Decalogue, therefore, are in accordance with natural right ; but this direct revelation of God's will is not the only source from which the law of nature may be derived. The nature or end of man furnishes immediately and without demonstration certain universal principles {sententice com-

^ Melanchthon's treatises on ethics and politics are in his Opera (ed. Bretschneider and Bindseil), Vol. XVI. See especially the PhUosophia MoralU Epitome^ Bk. II, and the commentaries on Aristotle's Ethics and Politics.

MELANCHTHON 17

munes) — such, for example, as that man is adapted to social life — from which it is possible to derive by reasoning the practical rules of right living. What-, ever may be logically deduced from these principles of human nature, therefore, must be considered a^ included under natural law as well as imder the law of God.^ It is the business of philosophy — as distinct from theology — to detect and explain these fundamental principles that are written in nature, and by reason to determine in accordance with them the arrangements that are essential to physical existence. But a caution is here necessary, and Melanchthon explains that ^^not all the dreams of philosophers are to be regarded as oracles," but only those opinions are to be accepted which conform with the utmost precision to the requirements of logical deduction.* Such as do fulfil these conditions are truly natural law; and natural right, therefore, includes all human relations that can be derived either from the commands of God in the Decalogue, or from right reasoning about the nature of man.