The Statutes of the Theological Faculty, probably drawn up in 1533 by Melanchthon with Luther’s approval,[939] made it strictly incumbent on the teachers to preach the pure doctrine in accordance with the Confession of Augsburg; in the event of any difference of opinion a commission of judges was to decide; “after that the false opinion shall no longer be defended; if anyone obstinately persists in so doing, he is to be punished with such severity as to prevent him any more spreading abroad his wicked views.”[940] “The same Luther,” says Paulsen of this, “who, twelve years before, had declared that his conscience would not allow of his conceding to Christendom assembled in Council the right to determine the formula of faith, now claimed for the Wittenberg faculty—for this is what it amounts to—the unquestionable right to decide on faith. From 1535 to the day of his death Luther was without a break Dean of this Faculty.”[941]
Again, subsequent to 1535, the preachers and pastors sent out or officially recommended by Wittenberg had to take the so-called “Ordination Oath” which had been suggested by the Elector in order to exclude false preachers. The ministers to be appointed within the Electorate, and likewise those destined to take up appointments elsewhere, had to submit at Wittenberg to a searching examination on doctrine; only after passing it and taking an oath as to the future could they receive their commission. The examination is referred to in the Certificate of Ordination. Thus, in the Certificate of Heinrich Bock (who was sent to Reval in Livonia) which is dated May 17, 1540, and signed by Luther, Bugenhagen, Jonas and Melanchthon, it is set forth that he had undertaken to “preach to the people steadfastly and faithfully the pure doctrine of the Gospel which our Church confesses.” It is also stated that he adheres to the “consensus” of the “Catholic Church of Christ,” and, for this reason, is recommended to the Church of Reval.[942] A similar Certificate for the schoolmaster Johann Fischer, who had received a call to Rudolstadt “to the ministry of the Gospel,” is dated a month earlier. His doctrine, so it declares, had been found on examination to be pure and in accordance with the Catholic doctrine of the Gospel as professed by the Wittenbergers; a promise had also been received from him to teach the same faithfully to the people; for this reason “his call has been confirmed by public ordination.”[943] Fischer had received the “diaconate.”
As early as 1535 we read of the solemn ordination of a certain Johann (Golhart?), “examined by us and publicly ordained in the presence of our Church with prayers and hymns.” He was “ordained and confirmed by order of our sovereign,” having been called and chosen as “assistant minister” at Gotha by the local congregation headed by their pastor Myconius.[944]
The doctrine of the punishment of heretics was afterwards incorporated by Melanchthon in 1552, in the Wittenberg instructions composed by him and entitled: “The Examination of Ordinands.”[945]
Opinions of Protestant Historians
The above account of Luther’s intolerance is very much at variance with the Protestant view still current to some extent in erudite circles, but more particularly in popular literature. Luther, for all the harshness of his disposition, is yet regarded as having in principle advocated leniency, as having been a champion of personal religious freedom, and having only sanctioned severity towards the Anabaptists because of the danger of revolt. Below we shall, however, quote a series of statements from Protestant writers who have risen superior to such party prejudice.
Walther Köhler, in his “Reformation und Ketzerprozess” (1901), wrote:
“In Luther’s case it is impossible to speak of liberty of conscience or religious freedom.” “The death-penalty for heresy rested on the highest Lutheran authority.”[946] According to Köhler there can be no doubt that prosecution for heresy among the Protestants was practically Luther’s doing. “The views of the other reformers on the persecution and bringing to justice of heretics were merely the outgrowth of Luther’s plan, they contributed nothing fresh.”[947] The same writer is of opinion that the question, whether Luther would have approved of the execution of Servetus “must undoubtedly be answered in the affirmative.”[948] “It is certain that Luther would have agreed to the execution of Servetus; heresy as heresy is according to him deserving of death.”[949] One observation made by Köhler is significant enough, viz. “that, when the preaching of the Word proved ineffectual against the heretics,” Luther had recourse to the intervention of the secular authorities.[950]
The matter has been examined with equal frankness by P. Wappler in various studies in which he utilises new data taken from the archives.[951]