Another Martin Luther (King) and Natural Law in America

I last wrote on the Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation (The Protestant Reformation, Natural Law and America).  The article focused the development of natural law and individual rights in Europe and how Luther’s critiques led to important principles of American political philosophy.  I thought it might be useful to contrast another Martin Luther at the other end of the timeline, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.   We think of the Founders as those who began the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton.  However, the experiment in American liberty did not end in 1789 with the ratification of the Constitution.  Americans have debated, argued, protested and come to blows over the meaning and scope of freedom.  That struggle continues to this day though it remains based in classical principles of the Protestant Reformation, natural law and American contributions to personal liberty.

Thomas Jefferson laid down a succinct but complicated summary of the essence of American liberty in 1776 with the words: “all men are created equal.”  That statement was an aspiration, not a statement of fact.  Even after the Constitution became the law of the land, basic civil rights did not extend as far as we might think.  In Virginia, for example, not all white males had voting rights.  Only white male property owners could vote until the constitutional reform of 1830.

Though limited, the early version of the Constitution was still a significant advance in its time.  In 1789, over 75% of the world’s population were either enslaved or feudal serfs.  The Revolutionary generation expanded civil rights for many.  If we define the American Revolution as a debate over liberty, 1789 was only the beginning.  Thus, the class of individuals we label “Founders” includes not just the giants of the Revolutionary generation but also those who followed continuing to expand the definition of “men” and “equal.”  Abolitionists like Horace Greeley and Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, women’s suffragists including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony also count as Founders.

Martin Luther King deserves inclusion as a prominent Founder as well.  Dr. King is well known as a titan in the fight for civil rights of African Americans, but is underrated as a political philosopher.  Every American knows the vibrant concluding remarks made on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963: “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!”  Dr. King’s call was far more than an emotional appeal.  It was well grounded in the principles of natural law and American liberty.

Of Dr. King’s many writings and speeches, one of the best examples of the philosophical case he made for equal rights comes from his Letter From a Birmingham Jail written several months before the I Have A Dream speech.   On April 12, 1963, Dr. King was arrested peacefully protesting racial segregation in Birmingham, Alabama.  While awaiting release from jail, Dr. King learned of a “Call for Unity” made by eight local religious leaders (seven Christian pastors and one Jewish rabbi) that decried civil rights protests labelling Dr. King and other leaders as “extremists” and outsiders.

Dr. King responded by letter reciting the inequalities produced by segregation and discrimination.  The letter then turned to a philosophical explanation of the theory of laws.  His arguments rested on essential theory of American Constitutional law: God created natural laws which in turn grant every human being natural rights.  Dr. King began by defining just law as: “a man-made code that squares with the moral law  . . .  of God.  . . .  law that uplifts human personality is just.”  Conversely, an unjust law is one that: “is out of harmony with the moral law . . . that is not rooted in eternal and natural law.”  Here, Dr. King echoed one of the central themes of the Protestant Reformation, that every person has a conscience (an internal sense of right and wrong) which makes every individual equal in the eyes of God.  A just law is one that neutrally allows every person to follow their conscience.

Dr. King eloquently described the failure of discrimination: “segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality.  . . . Segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, but it is morally wrong and sinful.”  Just as Martin Luther established that secular laws must be grounded in the morality of natural law, so too did Dr. King.  Segregation laws denied African Americans the right to follow their conscience, meaningfully participate in the political arena, freely engage in the economic activity and enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Martin Luther wrote: “a Christian is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none.  A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all.”  Luther’s statement confirmed individual liberties while establishing dual attributes of natural rights.   With rights come duties.  A Christian has a duty to exercise their rights to build a government that protects the rights of others.  Here, Dr. King pointed out that white Americans had not lived up to their obligations to African Americans.  Segregation laws were “a code [where] a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself.”  White Americans who already enjoyed great liberty had a duty to create legal codes that empowered all to enjoy the same freedoms and had failed.

Finally, Dr. King established a new component to natural law theory in America: nonviolent protest.  He argued that unjust laws must be opposed vigorously and actively, but the manner of opposition mattered.  “One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly . . .  and with a willingness to accept the penalty.”  By violating an unjust law and voluntarily going to jail, the matter becomes public where “the natural medicines of air and light [expose] injustice . . . to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

Dr. King was expressing an ultimate faith in the power of good, a belief that all shared the same basic values of right and wrong.  If the Civil Rights Movement exposed injustice “to the light of human conscience,” the public would demand change.  But for that to work, protesters had to be “dutiful servants” even if they were not met with the same Christian spirit.  In the long run, forthright and honorable conduct would bring about the change of heart desired.  Anyone with a conscience (which includes everyone no matter their race) would recognize that equal rights for all was essential.

In response to being labelled “extreme,” Dr. King partially accepted the description but on his own terms. “[T]he question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be.  Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love [and] . . . the cause of justice?”  Dr. King based his version of extremism in the example of Christ who was an “extremist in love.”  He also cited Jefferson whose words “we hold these truths to be self-evident, all men are created equal” were an “extremist” defense of the natural rights for Americans.  If Jefferson’s words were universally true when applied to English rule, they must also apply with the same force to American law.  Protection of natural rights was so essential it sometimes required extremism.   If civil rights activists were extreme, it was in the best American tradition.  Dr. King cited the example of protesters who “at down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judeo-Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.”  Thus, civil rights protesters were upholding sacred rights granted and guaranteed by God and reduced to writing in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  Dr. King’s words deserve to be enshrined in the lexicon of American liberty along with the Declaration and the Constitution.  

The Letter From a Birmingham Jail is a classic and masterful recitation of how natural law applied to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.  Ultimately, Dr. King correctly predicted that publicizing discriminatory acts would awaken the conscience of Americans to end legalized segregation.  There is still work to be done, but by invoking natural law and forcing those with rights to fulfill their duties, we have a much more egalitarian society today.  In the never-ending quest to define American liberty, we have benefitted from great eloquence and resolve beginning in the American Revolution and continuing to modern times.  Dr. King’s advocacy is a reminder that we all must be ever vigilant in protecting our rights and fulfilling or duties as Americans.

Here is a link to the full text of Dr. King’s Letter From a Birmingham Jail.  I highly recommend a full reading:

http://www.nlnrac.org/american/american-civil-rights-movements/primary-source-documents/letter-from-a-birmingham-jail

 

To read more about Martin Luther, the Protestant Reformation, Natural Law and Natural Rights, please see: The Protestant Reformation, Natural Law and America