Saints & Rascals: Martin Luther and the Peasants’ Revolt

The Protestant Reformation, led by Martin Luther in the early 16th century, began as a movement challenging the corruption of the Catholic Church. Luther’s initial calls for religious reform inspired many, including the oppressed peasantry, who saw in his teachings a promise of social and economic justice. However, when the Peasants’ Revolt erupted in 1524–1525, Luther vehemently opposed the uprising, siding with the ruling princes and advocating brutal suppression. His response revealed a deep betrayal of the lower classes, exposing the limits of his revolutionary zeal when it threatened the existing social order.

A Bit of Folk Philosophy

Luther’s theological ideas, particularly his doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” and his attacks on Church authority, resonated with peasants who suffered under both ecclesiastical and feudal oppression. Many peasants interpreted Luther’s challenge to papal authority as a broader critique of all hierarchical oppression, including that of the nobility. The Twelve Articles of the Peasants (1525), a key manifesto of the revolt, explicitly referenced Luther’s ideas, demanding an end to serfdom, fair taxation, and the right to choose their own pastors. The peasants believed Luther would support their cause, as his teachings had emboldened them to seek justice.

Why did the peasants initially see Martin Luther as a hero?

To understand the peasants’ expectation of symmetry between Luther’s attack on papal authority and their own struggle against feudal oppression, we have to understand a bit of folk philosophy.

Medieval and early modern European society operated on top of an ancient pagan philosophical structure that had become Christianized. Among the “high” culture, this metaphysics has been called the Great Chain of Being — a belief that God structured the universe in a fixed, interlocking hierarchy, from angels to kings to peasants (Lovejoy 1936). Among the “low” culture, the worldview of Old Europe was an organic, holistic one where everything was interconnected and reciprocal (Gimbutas 1991).

This was not just a social model but a metaphysical law. When Luther disrupted one part of that order (the Church), peasants inferred that the entire system was open to renegotiation.

Peasant Folk Logic:

• If the Pope’s authority was deemed man-made (as Luther argued), then all claims of divinely sanctioned superiority — including nobility’s — were suspect.
• Heuristic Symmetry: Corruption in one link (Church) implied corruption in others (feudalism).

The Twelve Articles (1525) explicitly tied their demands to scripture, arguing that if Luther could reform the Church using the Bible, they could reform feudalism the same way.

The third article specifically attacks serfdom using biblical logic:

“‘It has been the custom hitherto for men to hold us as their own property…which is pitiable…for Christ has redeemed us all with His precious blood, the lowly as well as the great. Accordingly, the Bible proves that we are free and wish to be free.””

Crucially, peasants didn’t see hierarchy as unconditional; they understood it as a reciprocal covenant, a remnant from earlier clan-based systems:

• Higher orders (lords/clergy) had duties: protection, justice, fair governance.
• Lower orders (peasants) owed labor and obedience — but only if rulers upheld their end.

When lords violated this (e.g., through enclosures, excessive taxes, or serfdom), peasants saw it as voiding the divine contract, justifying rebellion.

Luther’s attack on the Church’s corruption mirrored this:

Luther’s Hammer on the Revolt

Instead of standing with the peasants, Luther responded with fury. In his pamphlet Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants (1525), he urged the German princes to “smite, slay, and stab” the rebels, comparing them to “mad dogs.” He argued that rebellion against secular authority was a sin, even if that authority was unjust. This stance starkly contradicted his earlier defiance of the Church, revealing his prioritization of political stability over social justice.

Luther’s violent rhetoric justified the moral sadism of the nobility’s brutal crackdown. The revolt was crushed with extreme cruelty — estimates suggest over 100,000 peasants were slaughtered. Leaders of the rebellion were tortured and executed, and surviving peasants faced even harsher feudal conditions. Luther’s betrayal was not merely ideological; it had deadly consequences.

Why Luther Betrayed the Peasants

Several factors explain Luther’s abandonment of the lower classes:

1. Fear of Anarchy: Luther believed that social upheaval would lead to chaos, undermining his religious reforms. He depended on the support of German princes to protect Protestantism and saw the revolt as a threat to his movement.

2. Theological Conservatism: Despite challenging the Church, Luther upheld a strict view of secular authority, derived from his interpretation of Romans 13, which demanded obedience to rulers.

3. Class Bias: Luther, though a monk, was educated and aligned with the interests of the urban elite and nobility. His vision of reform was spiritual, not socioeconomic.

The Seeds of the Protestant Work Ethic

Luther’s betrayal of the peasants may have laid the ideological groundwork for what later became known as the Protestant work ethic — a concept famously analyzed by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905). Weber argued that Protestantism, particularly Calvinism, fostered a culture of discipline, thrift, and hard work, which contributed to the rise of modern capitalism. However, Luther’s more germane role in this development is often overshadowed by Calvin’s more extreme rendition of these concepts.

By crushing the peasants’ demands for economic justice, Luther reinforced a social order where obedience to authority and acceptance of one’s station in life were paramount. His doctrine of the “calling” (Beruf) emphasized that labor was a divine duty, regardless of its rewards. This teaching discouraged social mobility or rebellion, instead promoting resignation to one’s earthly lot as a form of spiritual discipline.

Connection to the Protestant Work Ethic:

Luther’s suppression of the Peasants’ Revolt may have indirectly shaped the Protestant work ethic by:

1. Breaking the Reciprocal Covenant: Luther’s theology emphasized spiritual freedom and reinforced earthly hierarchies, creating a mindset where hard work and submission to authority were seen as virtues rather than signs of oppression. This also absolved the lords and later capital-owners from the reciprocal duty to respect the needs of the people.

2. Legitimizing Economic Exploitation: By siding with the nobility, Luther helped maintain an economic system where the lower classes were expected to labor dutifully without demanding fair treatment — a precursor to later capitalist labor relations.

3. Shifting Focus to Individual Responsibility Over Collective Duty: The failure of the revolt pushed Protestantism toward an inward-focused piety, where economic success (or suffering) was interpreted as a sign of divine favor (or testing), rather than a result of labor exploitation.

“To Luther, the best friend lords ever had!” (a tavern joke)

Labor shortages from executions and fleeing workers led to fallow fields and famine in the 1530s and delayed the development of capitalism in German peasant economies until the 1800s. In the aftermath of reprisals, the remaining peasants suffered under increased taxation and fines such as 30% of harvests and 50% of labor unpaid to their local lords. To further demoralize the peasants, they were forced to attend Lutheran sermons preaching obedience to authority (Romans 13), and required written permission from their lords to travel outside of their village.

The rebellion had to take a more subversive approach and turned to bitter jokes and local legends. In Eisleben (Luther’s birthplace), a folk tale circulated that Luther had cursed the peasants for misusing Scripture:

“When the peasants rose in God’s name/ Luther cried, “They shame His name!’/ Now their bones bleach in the sun/ And their children beg for crumbs.”

This was likely spread by preachers to deter future rebellions, but peasants subverted it to highlight Luther’s hypocrisy.

By discouraging class struggle and redirecting dissent into personal piety, Luther’s teachings helped create a cultural framework where economic subservience was sanctified. This ideological shift, later refined by Calvinism, became a cornerstone of capitalist ideology — one that valorized labor discipline while justifying inequality. Thus, Luther’s betrayal of the peasants was not just a momentary political choice but a pivotal moment in the shaping of Western economic thought.

Saints & Rascals is a series that explores the lives and legacies of historical figures, exploring their complexities, contradictions, and lasting impact. It challenges mythologized perceptions while highlighting overlooked aspects of their actions and ideologies.

Sources:

• Blickle, Peter. The Revolution of 1525: The German Peasants’ War from a New Perspective (1981).
• Engels, Friedrich. The Peasant War in Germany (1850).
• Gimbutas, Marija. The Civilization of the Goddess: The World of Old Europe. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991.
• Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain of Being (1936)
• Luther, Martin. Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants (1525).
• Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905).