Lutero y el turco (1)

Me he referido al reformador en varias ocasiones. En esta con gran escándalo de almas simples (¿para cuándo la respuesta?). Ahora leo que escribió en 1528 un tratadillo poniendo los puntos sobre las íes. Aquí está: On war against Islamic reign of terror. Lo acabo de leer, y he cambiado mi opinión al respecto: No es cierto que prefiera el turbante a la mitra, los odia a los dos por igual.

Lutero manifiesta a la vez ingenuidad política, fanatismo medieval y los perniciosos efectos del nominalismo. Algunos asuntos:

Primero, Lutero hace suya la autoría de aquella afirmación:

Pope Leo the Tenth, in the bull in which he put me under the ban, condemned, among other statements, the following one. I had said that “to fight against the Turk is the same thing as resisting God, who visits our sin upon us with this rod.” From this article they may get it, who say that I prevent and dissuade from war against the Turk. I still confess freely that this article is mine and that I put it forth and defended it at the time; and if things in the world were in the same state now that they were in then, I would still have to put it forth and defend it. But it is not fair to forget how things then stood in the world, and what my grounds and reasons were, and still keep my words and apply them to another situation where those grounds and reasons do not exist. With this kind of art, who could not make the Gospel a pack of lies or pretend that it contradicted itself?

Es decir, sigue considerando al Papa tan detestable como al Turco, con la diferencia de que no es tan peligroso. No tienen tantas divisiones.

Lutero quiere que la guerra contra el turco sea una empresa estrictamente política, realizada por el emperador Carlos para proteger a sus súbditos. No quiere cruzada, ni que el papa (el anticristo para él) predique en su favor y conceda indulgencias, etc. Dice que son excusa para embolsarse los dineros:

For the popes had never seriously intended to make war on the Turk, but used the Turkish war as a conjurer’s hat, playing around in it, and robbing Germany of money by means of indulgences, whenever they took the notion.

Eso sí, quiere que se predique el arrepentimiento antes de iniciar la operación militar:

For I shall never advise a heathen or a Turk, let alone a Christian, to attack another or begin war. That is nothing else than advising bloodshed and destruction, and it brings no good fortune in the end, as I have written in the book On Soldiers; and it never does any good when one knave punishes another without first becoming good himself.

Insiste en ello. Primero arrepentimiento; segundo, nada de banderas religiosas, la guerra contra el turco es una asunto meramente político. Hay que decir que Lutero queda como un señor desde el punto de vista moral. Políticamente es solo un ingenuo. Si no hubiera sido por el Turco, el Emperador Carlos quien encarga la maniobra hubiera dado buena cuenta de su reforma. Aquí está la condena de la cruzada:

Again, if I were a soldier and saw in the field a priests’ banner, or banner of the cross, even though it were a crucifix I should run as though the devil were chasing me; and even if they won a victory, by God’s decree, I should not take any part in the booty or the rejoicing.

El arrepentimiento es condición sine que non:

Verily, this fight must be begun with repentance, and we must reform our lives, or we shall fight in vain; as the prophet Jeremiah says in the chapter…

Siguen referencias al Antiguo Testamento, un texto tan querido por fanáticos de todo pelaje. Después se expone el mal mahometano:

In this connection, the people should be told of all the dissolute life and ways that the Turk practices, so that they may the better feel the need of prayer. To be sure, it has often disgusted me and still does, that neither our great lords nor our scholars have been at any pains to give us any certain knowledge about the life of the Turks in the two classes, spiritual and temporal; and yet he has come so near to us. … there is no need for lies; the truth is all too great.

Tienen toda la razón al respecto: lo primero es conocer al enemigo. Una curiosidad:

I have some pieces of Mohammed’s Koran which might be called in German a book of sermons or doctrines of the kind that we call pope’s decretals.

Curiosa comparación. Más:

it pleases the reason extraordinarily well that Christ should not be God, as the Jews also believe, and especially is Reason pleased with the thought that men are to rule and bear the sword and get up in the world; then the devil pushes it along. Thus a faith is patched together out of the faith of Jews, Christians and heathen. He gets it from the Christians when he praises Christ and Mary and the apostles and other saints. He gets it from the Jews that people are not to drink wine, are to fast the certain times of the year, wash like the Nazarites, and eat off the ground, and go on with such holy works as part of our monks do and hope for everlasting life at the Judgment Day, for, holy people that they are, they believe in the resurrection of the dead, though few of the papists believe in it.

Es cierto que la Encarnación es dogma imposible a la razón: lo infinito hecho finito. Los primeros siglos del cristianismo están marcados por divisiones y herejías al respecto. El final no lo entiendo ¿Los católicos (papistas) no creen en la resurrección de la carne? Imagino que acusa al catolicismo de adherencias paganas.

 Continuará.

Be Sociable, Share!

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Lutero y el turco (2) | La Yijad en Eurabia

Dejar una contestacion

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada.


*