Martin Luther, Political Thought

This article focuses on the political thought of the Protestant reformers during the Reformation, both those thinkers historians commonly refer to as moderate or “magisterial” reformers (especially Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Huldrych Zwingli) and those they refer to as “radical” reformers. Although the political concerns of Protestantism remained profoundly religious, and most reformers retained in various guises the view that authority was bipartite, the political theory of the reformers was modern in its concentration on secular authority and the essential character, function, and scope of the state's power. The diversity of Reformation political thought also emerged over the issue of whether secular authorities should play a positive, even a leading role in the renewal of Christianity to which Protestant reformers were committed. In the mid-1520s, a massive popular insurrection, known as the German Peasants' War and partly inspired by the Reformation, produced a variety of challenging new political ideas. Its repression fundamentally altered the course of the Reformation and produced new divisions not only between magisterial and radical reformers but also amongst the surviving radicals.

Download Full-text

Désobéissance civile et libéralisme

Canadian Journal of Political Science ◽

10.1017/s000842391300053x ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 46 (2) ◽

pp. 369-396 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Manuel Cervera-Marzal

Keyword(s):

Political Thought ◽

Martin Luther ◽

Civil Disobedience ◽

Democratic Legitimacy ◽

The Political ◽

The Will ◽

Martin Luther King ◽

Liberal Concept ◽

Established Order ◽

Liberal Thought

Résumé. Des citoyens peuvent-ils désobéir à la loi, pourtant issue de la volonté majoritaire et de la décision du Parlement légitimement élu, au seul motif qu'elle leur semble injuste ? Face à la pensée conservatrice, tenante de l'ordre établi et réfractaire à la moindre transgression (« mieux vaut une injustice qu'un désordre »), la philosophie libérale contemporaine a fourni une défense de la légitimité démocratique de la désobéissance civile. Cependant, les justifications rawlsienne et habermassienne de la désobéissance civile semblent bien timorées dès qu'on accepte de les comparer à la pensée politique des activistes désobéissants eux-mêmes, à savoir Gandhi, Martin Luther King et Howard Zinn. Cette « pensée désobéissante » méconnue, voire occultée, vient révéler les insuffisances et les présupposés de la conception libérale de la désobéissance civile.Abstract. Can citizens disobey the law, which comes from the will of the majority and the decision of the legitimately elected Parliament, merely because it seems to them unjust? Opposing conservative thought, which defends the established order and condemns any transgression, contemporary liberal thought has provided a defense of the democratic legitimacy of civil disobedience. However, the Rawlsian and Habermasian justifications of civil disobedience seem rather weak when compared to the political thought of disobedient activists themselves, namely Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Howard Zinn. This overlooked “disobedient thought” reveals the shortcomings and assumptions of the liberal concept of civil disobedience.

Download Full-text