Boehmer justly points out, that Luther’s standpoint and doctrine as a
whole, essentially spelt not only “unfettered freedom of teaching, but
also entire freedom of worship.”
Meanwhile, however, Luther had already repeatedly urged those in power,
especially his own sovereign, to do their supposed duty, and back up the
new Evangel by their authority and by forbidding Catholic worship, the
Mass and Catholic sermons.
In what follows we shall deal with Luther’s behaviour towards the
Catholics, as distinguished from his attitude towards sectarians within
his own camp.
_Intolerance Towards Catholics in Theory and Practice_
We should be making a serious mistake were we to judge of Luther’s
tolerance towards the olden religion from his statements above on behalf
of freedom. In Protestant literature, even to the present day, such a
one-sided view has found a place, though it has long since been rejected
by clear-sighted historians of that faith. In the course of the above
narrative instances have been met with repeatedly of Luther’s intolerance
in theory and practice with regard to those who thought differently. Here
we shall refer concisely to various details already set on record and
then draw some new facts and utterances from the abundant store bearing
on the matter in hand.
It was “his duty to oppose false teachers,” Luther had written to his
Elector on May 8, 1522, of the Canons of Altenburg.[813] In the same
way, with much storming, he had insisted that the secular power should
make an end of Catholic worship in the collegiate church of Wittenberg.
From the standpoint of his principles it is rather remarkable that,
when the persecuted Canons of Wittenberg appealed to the Elector’s
authority, Luther retorted: “What has the Elector to do with us in
such things?”[814] and that, later, in one of his sermons, he boldly
replied to their objections in law: “What care we about the Elector?
He commands only in worldly matters.”[815] In making a stand against
the celebration of Mass at Wittenberg he had frankly declared: “It
is the duty of the authorities to resist and to punish such public
blasphemy,” just as they are bound to punish the blasphemies uttered
in the streets by godless men. The Elector and his Councillors were
quite aware of the contradictions involved in Luther’s teaching.
Hence, at the Prince’s instance, the Court pointed out to him on Nov.
24, 1524, that “he himself preached that the Word should be left to
fight its own way, and that this it would do in its own good time, so
God willed”; he ought himself to be the first “to practise what he
taught and preached.”[816] In spite of this Luther, soon after, was
successful in violently making a clean sweep of the Catholic Mass at
Wittenberg.[817]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account