Editor,
In the Sept. 26 edition of Current in Carmel, Anya Bass claimed “Luther wasn’t a populist” in a letter to the editor about my book, “Twin Populist Reform Warriors 500 Years Apart.” She is certainly entitled to her opinion, though that does not change a word’s definition.
The first words I write are, “It will be helpful in this analysis to be clear on what we mean by ‘populism.’ A dictionary definition reads: ‘Support for the concerns of ordinary people, or the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people,’” especially to those who feel exploited by the established privileged elite. Populists can be leftist, rightist or centrist. Both Trump and Luther woo alienated publics, taking their side to restore and reform, not overthrow, the established order.
The “To the Christian Nobility” treatise may not “sound very populist,” but it is called “a cry from the heart of the people.” Luther attacks the corruption of the Church, the abuses of its authority to control people, their emotions, thoughts and actions while asserting the right of laypeople to spiritual independence.
Thomas Muntzer, whom Anya cites as the “real populist,” was initially a supporter of Luther but felt Luther was not daring enough and that the Reformation had only gone halfway. Luther was pastoral and pedagogical, not wanting the Reformation to get ahead of the people, so he took time to explain and convince until the people were ready for change.
Muntzer advocated what is known as “The Radical Reformation,” urging the destruction of the Church’s icons and preaching revolt to peasants. Luther had written up the grievances the peasants had but cautioned them against taking matters into their own hands, as the Gospel is not advanced through violence. He simultaneously was critical of the princes and lords in their oppressive treatment of the peasants.
Paul F. Swartz, Carmel
