The Evangelization Station

MARTIN LUTHER’S MENTAL HEALTH

Victor R. Claveau, MJ

One of the most notable circumstances connected with the career of Martin Luther consists in the marked contrast, which we find in his mind, morals, and life, as a Catholic monk and a Protestant Reformer. Every medical person who critically examines the career of this unfortunate man must come to the conclusion that he suffered, during certain portions of his innovative career, from a form of mental perversion which psychoanalysts’ term “religious monomania” (a mental derangement restricted to one idea or group of ideas). So long as he resided within the walls of the Erfurt monastery as an Augustinian monk, and submitted to the rules and regulations of the order, he was temperate, modest, moral, and faithful to all of his duties. During this entire period, he was charitable, patient, tolerant, and just toward all, firm and unwavering in his religious convictions, and prompt and faithful in his performance.

Although his parents were in humble circumstances, he succeeded in securing the aid of able teachers, and his natural talent and thirst for knowledge impelled him to study and enabled him to become a moderately good linguist, and reasonably well acquainted with the theological literature of his day. As an orator, he possessed remarkable ability. His flow of language, his memory, and his fund of metaphor, good-humored ridicule, invective, and sarcasm, were inexhaustible. When attacking or refuting the opinions or principles of another he possessed extraordinary powers. As soon as he left the Church, all these natural faculties were brought into action, and became the sport and playthings of a perverted, twisted intellect. As a child, a youth, and devoted monk, he was amiable, conscientious, and eager to perform his religious duties: then as a Reformer, he became bold, intolerant, intemperate, reckless, and fanatical. Eberhardt describes Luther’s deeply rooted colossal egotism:

“From the first he was a glib, caustic lecturer, given to scurrilous and bitter attacks upon others, infallibly interpreting their motives, seeking laughs by vulgar or even obscene jokes. Later he poured forth unrestrained abuse, obscenity, and filth against the papacy, the bishops, and priests; against anyone, even of his own party, who opposed him. His rhetoric was heavy, vulgar, exaggerated, and repetitious, for he wrote or spoke hastily on the spur of the moment or in the grasp of passion. Vain and jealous, he easily yielded to flattery. When he avowed faults, it might be accompanied with comparisons to those of the saints. At the height of his power he was dictatorial: ‘Dr. Martin Luther, God’s own notary and witness of His Gospel…. I am the prophet of the Germans…. I understand the Scripture a great deal better than the pope and all his people…. Not for a thousand years has God bestowed such great gifts on any bishops as He has on me…. I am not far behind many of the fathers.’”[1]

In 1517 Luther was thirty-three years of age, and had been an Augustinian Monk for eleven years. Up to this time he remained true to the Church in faith and in practice. Luther’s first opposition to the Church originated in Pope Leo’s deviation from the previous custom of consigning the dispensation of indulgences solely to the Augustinians. The object of these spiritual privileges or indulgences was to raise funds for the rebuilding the St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. The promulgation of these indulgences was entrusted in part to the Dominicans, and in part to the Franciscans. As an Augustinian, Luther resented this transfer of patronage, and here we find the original motive of his innovations. In Luther’s day, the rivalry between the different religious orders in Germany was quite intense. It was natural that each should desire to secure and retain as much patronage and influence as possible. And this fact readily explains the impulse of Luther and his brethren of the Augustinian order, in their opposition to the transfer of the dispensation of indulgences to their rivals the Dominicans. Here is the germ of Luther’s defection-a small spark of envy developed in a naturally impulsive and inflammable heart. Here was an insignificant morbid element, which was destined to contaminate the whole moral and intellectual nature of the man, and rouse into activity the fires of passion, ambition, and blind frenzy. Step by step he trampled upon the truths of religion, and madly seized hold of error after error, until finally even his own friends regarded him as a perverted and ferocious fanatic.

The Dominican, John Tetzel was commissioned to preach the indulgence. According to Grisar:

“In his sermons, which were attended by a large number of people, he adhered to the explicit directions of the ecclesiastical authorities of Mayence, although he was unable to abstain from rhetorical exaggerations. The directions of the Mayence authorities adequately emphasized that an indulgence is a remission of punishment, not of sin, and expressly required a contrite confession as a condition. In one respect, however, the directions were defective. They declared that an indulgence applicable to the dead became efficacious upon the performance of the prescribed good works, regardless of whether one was in the state of grace or not. Some theologians held this opinion and it was embodied in several other episcopal instructions. The problems arising from the Church’s teaching on indulgences had not yet all been clearly solved. The very nature of indulgences had not yet been dogmatically defined. It was a matter of practice, taught be the theologians; but its genuineness was warranted by the ordinary teaching authority of the Church (magisterium eccesiae ordinarium).[2]

At this time Luther was a professor of philosophy at the University of Wittenberg. He had become disaffected toward the philosophy of Aristotle, and the scholastic system of St. Thomas Aquinas. Burning with a fierce hatred against the court of Rome, he was eager and able to seize on the reputed exaggerations of Tetzel and his companions in the matter of indulgences. He wished to vent his spleen against a rival order, and through them against the Roman court; to obtain notoriety for himself; to indulge his humor for novelty; and to appear in the attractive character of a zealot and Reformer. Luther’s character is impressed on almost every page of his writings, and on the great events of his life. To his considerable storehouse of knowledge, acquired by patient study under able teachers, he added great fearlessness, productive resourcefulness, facility of language and metaphor, and a fondness of applause, coupled with an unbounded ego and love of personal power. These characteristics burst forth almost into frenzy against those of his party who dared oppose him. Above all he poured out a destructive ferocity of abuse, which, throughout his whole career, which he heaped, without consideration of a persons social position, or character, upon every foe, or former friend.

Vaughan describes the close connection between self-control and virtue:

“One of the principal parts of personality most seriously affected by mental and emotional disorders is the power of controlling one’s self. This aspect of mental illness has special significance for the religious, in as much as one of the goals of asceticism is self-control through the acquiring of virtue. The neurotic or psychotic religious almost invariably shows a deficiency in the area of control. Frequently, one of the first signs that all is not right with a particular priest or sister is a growing inability to control behavior, emotions, imagination, and thinking. The religious has terrible outbursts of temper, which seem beyond all control. Or, he may have numerous fears, which he knows are irrational, but still he cannot put them out of his mind.  Again, his imagination may be filled with a constant stream of uncontrollable images. When he finds himself in certain situations, an association with past events in his life is established and an endless uninhibited flow of images pours through his mind.”[3]

Luther never learned to control his emotions.

Vaughan goes on to describe symptoms of neurotic behavior:

“A neurotic is a person who is beset with anxiety, tension, and peculiar patterns of behavior which deviate from what is considered normal. He is still, however, in contact with the reality of the world in which he lives. In this latter aspect, he differs from the psychotic, who has in some way lost contact with reality and lives in a world of his own making, whether this be through the medium of hallucinations or a system of delusions. The neurotic religious is very much aware of his own sufferings and the disturbance he is causing within the community by his unusual mode of acting. Often this awareness on the part of the neurotic is the very thing that so provokes his superior, and fellow religious, who reason: ‘He knows what he is doing. Why does he not stop behaving this way? It can only be his ill will that makes him continue.’”[4]

During the height of his popularity, Luther was almost continually under the influence of morbid impressions. His chief hallucinations consisted in visions of Satan, and of men with horns and tails, with the features of animals, converted into various inanimate objects, dressed in all sorts of strange and fantastic garbs, some foaming at the mouth, others roaring and screaming with rage. While staying at the castle of Wartburg, he himself declared that he had conferences with the devil. He described the appearance, voice, and manner of his Satanic friend; had arguments with him concerning private Masses; acknowledges that the devil got the best of the argument, and convinced him of his errors; and he decided to follow Satan’s advice.

According to Grisar, Luther announced to his friend George Spalatin:

“I am suffering from temptation, and out of temper; so don’t be offended. There is more than one Satan contending with me. I am alone, and yet at times not alone.”[5]

He believed he was visibly pursued by infernal powers because of his praiseworthy discoveries. His intimate friend, the physician Matthew Ratzeberger, quotes Luther as saying that, ‘Because he was so lonely, he was beset with ghosts and noisy spirits which gave him much concern, and he drove them all away by prayer; but did not wish to talk about it.’”[6]

Œcolampadius, (a Greek rendering of his original name Hausschein) an apostate monk, introduced the Reformation into Basel (1527) and set an example to the other monks by taking a wife.[7] As one of Luther’s own disciples, and a leading Reformer, Œcolampadius, wrote of him as follows:

“He is puffed up with pride and arrogance, and is seduced by Satan.”  The same brother Reformer adds in another place, “that he was possessed not by one, but by a whole troop of devils.” “and that he wrote all his works by the impulse and the dictation of the devil, with whom he had dealings, and who in the struggle seemed to have thrown him by victorious arguments.”[8]

“This man,” wrote Hospinian, a careful observer of the times and a contemporaneous Reformer, “is absolutely mad. He never ceases to combat truth against all justice, even against the cry of his own conscience.” It was a favorite saying of his “that unless we have the devil hanging about our necks we are but pitiful speculative theologians.”[9] His brother Protestants of the Church of Zurich wrote of him as follows: “But how strangely does this fellow let himself be carried away by his devils! How disgusting is his language, and how full are his words of the devil of hell!”

One of the most deplorable features of Luther’s mental perversion was his shameless blasphemy against religion, the Church, and even God Himself. It is a mystery how a mind such as his could have led astray so many intelligent, reasoning believers in Christianity. It is a marvel that a man whose daily life demonstrated the fact that he was mentally disturbed, could have coined a new creed, a new religion, dubbed it with his own name, and then have enticed a sect of believers and followers!

The following are but a few blasphemous observations from Luther’s writings that should suffice to show his character and thoughts: “We must remove the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) out of sight and heart.”[10] “They are fools who attempt to overcome temptations {to lust} by fasting, prayer and chastisement. For such temptations and immoral attacks are easily overcome when there are plenty of maidens and women.”[11] “I sit here in idleness and pray, alas, little, and sigh not for the Church of God. Much more am I consumed by the fires of my unbridled flesh. In a word, I who should burn of the spirit, am consumed by the flesh, and by lasciviousness.”[12] “I burn with a thousand flames in my unsubdued flesh: I feel myself carried on with rage towards women that approaches madness. I who aught to be fervent in spirit, am only fervent in impurity.”[13] On Nov. 25, 1521, Luther wrote to the Augustinian monks in Wittenberg: “With how much pain and labor did I scarcely justify my conscience that I alone should proceed against the Pope, hold him for Antichrist, and the bishops for his apostles. How often did my heart punish me and reproach me with this strong argument: “Art thou alone wise? Could all the others err and have erred for a long time? How if thou errest and leadest into error so many people who would all be damned forever?[14]” “When you vow a vow to God, do not delay paying it; for he has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you vow. It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.”[15] Luther broke all his vows.

In addition, Eberhardt demonstrates that Luther was a demagogue and a congenital liar:

“Though some of his lies may have been the consequence of gradual self-deception, many more were clearly deliberate. He forged papal documents and misrepresented Catholic doctrine: ‘No pope, father, or bishop ever preached Christ; the Church taught that all were saved through Aristotle; that works alone counted; in the Church there was no personal contact with Christ, but all went through the hierarchy; the popes forbade marriage and considered it sinful.’ To be sure, Luther was an expansive and voluble speaker who often used hyperbole and exaggeration. Yet convicted to his face of falsehood on several occasions, he merely poured forth-loud torrents of abuse. He scrupled not to give contradictory advice and then later deny responsibility, as in the case of Philip of Hesse’s ‘dispensation’ for bigamy. In general, judged by his own words alone, Luther’s character left much to be desired-though allowance must be made for his bravado and bombast. When one has enumerated his lack of avarice that endeared him to the common people, his bluff, hearty good-fellowship, his rough good humor when not vexed, his good qualities are nearly exhausted. Mentally he was brilliant, but superficial: a frenzied student, he later abandoned profound study and coasted easily on ready eloquence. A pioneer, if not the creator, of good modern literary German, he boggled not at slipshod or dishonest principles of translation in his version of the Bible. He was a man of little prayer, and that without resignation to the divine will. He preached mortification, but did not practice it after his break with the Church. As a monk, his self-description of excessive penances is contradicted by testimony of fellow monks. Luther seems eternally to have been an average monk, neither the saint of his own imaginings nor the demon of contemporary Catholic controversialists. It is greatly to be feared that he stifled his conscience in 1521-22, 1527-28, and 1537. At these times he fought with what he describes as ‘temptations’ which, he says, were violent at first and in later years ebbed away, though leaving a recurrent melancholy. It is not for the historian to examine Luther’s conscience; here it may merely be remarked that Luther reported the gist of these ‘inner voices’ as follows: ‘Who called upon you to do things such as no man ever did before? … You are not called….  Even though the papacy be not without its sins and errors, what about you? Are you infallible? Are you without sin? … See how much evil arises from your doctrine…. Are you alone wise and are all others mistaken? Is it likely that so many centuries were all in the wrong? … It will not be well with you when you die. Go back, go back; submit, submit.”[16]

Sleidan, a Protestant historian of the time, not only asserts that Luther was very immoral, but that he often acknowledged it. Philip Melanchthon asserts: “that he [Luther] was so well aware of his immorality, that be wished they would remove him from the office of preaching.”[17] Maimbourg declares that be was often intoxicated at banquets, and on one occasion of this kind thus addressed his friends: “My dear friends, we cannot die till we have caught hold of Lucifer by the tail. I saw his back yesterday from the castle turrets.” “The Black Eagle Tavern at Wittenburg, for fifteen years, from 1525 to 1540, had no more regular customer than Luther, the Beer pope, as the Sacramentarians called him.  There he took his accustomed seat, and soon would be joined by his intimate and confidential friends or disciples.[18] It was there, on an oaken bench, were held those conversations which have been collected in German by the title of “Tisch-Reden” or in English “Table Talk”, the first German edition of which was published at Eisleben in 1566. Indulging largely, often intemperately, in malt liquors, they talked:

“…of philosophy, and witchcraft, criticism and poetry, moral and astrology; of the kingdom of the Antichrist, to wit, the pope, bishops and priests; of Catholic superstitions, that is to say the sacraments; of the future prospects of the Reformation, in other words, the downfall of the modern Babylon, the extinction of popery, the shipwreck of the bark of Peter, or of Sodom, as they were pleased to call it; of the triumph of God’s word, exemplified in the closing of some monastery, the violation of some nun, the apostasy of some friar, who had thrown his cord and cowl at the head of his superior; or the marriage of some apostle of the new gospel. The monks were frequently the subjects of these conversations, and the companions were never at a loss for sarcasm, irony, and jokes against these unfortunate individuals, each guest having always a ready store. They spoke of the other sex in a manner that would shock the ear; but in those days they were less refined than they are now, or perhaps were not afraid of being overheard.”[19] 

Many of Luther’s blasphemous sentiments were uttered while under the influence. Not only Luther, but his friends and disciples Melanchthon and Martin Bucer of Strasburg openly sanctioned polygamy, as may be seen in the written permission which they gave the young Philip II, Landgrave of Hesse, to marry a second wife while the first one was living and not divorced. Karlstadt went still further, and desired to make polygamy an obligatory duty. “Luther and Melanchthon had previously expressed themselves in favor of the permissibility of bigamy in particular cases.[20] They believed that there was justification for it in the Old Testament, citing the cases in which God permitted polygamy in exceptional instances. In certain cases, Luther too, as he himself says, had counseled the contraction of bigamous marriage, when for instance, husbands complained of severe and incurable disease of their wives or of their refusal to render debitum [The obligation of the marriage act]. Philip of Hesse was acquainted with these public pronouncements as well as with Luther’s proffer of bigamy to Henry VIII of England.”[21]

Luther was also both intolerant and cruel, as his ferocious persecutions of the Anabaptists and other innovating opponents bear witness. In 1525, Luther publicly supported freedom of religion: “The [secular] authorities are not to hinder anyone from teaching and believing what he pleases.”[22] “In 1530, Luther demanded the exercise of force and bloody repression on the part of his Elector and the other Protestant rulers. Not only are those Anabaptists who rebel against the authority of the State to be dealt with harshly, but also those who are not in rebellion. ‘Those also are not to be tolerated, but are to be treated as public blasphemers.’ To deviate from his teaching was equivalent to ‘public blasphemy’ and deserving of death. ‘The authorities shall hand over knaves of that ilk to their proper master, to wit, Master Hans’ (i.e., the hangman). The Sacramentarians and the papists, too, being blasphemers, must not be tolerated.’”[23] In 1536, at the Lutheran Synod of Homberg, Luther, Melanchthon, and other prominent innovators, voted in favor of putting to death every Anabaptist who persisted in his doctrines, or who should return again after banishment.

            Among the scandalous acts of Luther was his marriage in the year 1525 to Catherine von Bora, a twenty-seven-year-old Cistercian nun of great beauty. Alluding to his seduction and marriage of the nun, Luther remarked soon after the performance of the ceremony, “that his marriage had made him so despicable, that he hoped his humiliation would rejoice the angels will laugh, and vex the devils.”[24] The matter of Luther’s marriage aroused a great deal of unfavorable comment even at that time, mostly because of the impudent and unwise conduct of the former monk with regard the former nuns who were living at Wittenberg. “It seems that she had been previously attached to a young student at Nuremberg, Jerome Baumgärtner; and we find Luther writing to him, Oct. 12th, 1524: ‘If you are anxious to have your Catherine, come here at once, or she will become the property of another, who has already got her with him in his house. Still, she has not yet overcome her love for you. And, after all, I should perhaps be better pleased that you, having a prior title, should be united to her.’”[25] These acts of the self-styled Reformer were deeply deplored by Melanchthon and a majority of his more respectable friends, as licentious and disgraceful. They also greatly diminished his influence.

About the year 1532 Luther published his book against private Masses. In this book he declares that be had several conferences with the devil and that the subject of private Masses was a special topic of discussion. Up to this period he informs us that he had been a firm believer in these Masses, and had devoutly said them during his life. But the arguments of the Prince of Darkness changed his views, and he renounced his former opinions as useless and wicked, and incorporated this additional article of Protestantism in his new religion. When the devil appeared to him, he states that he was very frightened at his tremendous voice, his imperious manner, and his forcible arguments. His heart beat violently, he trembled, and he perspired, but nevertheless held a respectable argument with his diabolical opponent. From this experience Luther expresses the opinion that the devil often appears to holy men toward morning, and strangles them to death by his tremendous voice and still more tremendous arguments. He believed that his opponents were all possessed of devils and attributed the sudden deaths of Œcolampadius and Emser and others like them to this cause.[26]. Is it not possible or even probable that all Luther’s inspirations may have been derived from the same source?

On the 18th of February 1546, Luther died. If we compare Luther’s mental condition prior to 1517, with what it became subsequently, the conclusion will be irresistible that be was a victim of mental illness. While he was tranquilly pursuing his studies as a youth, and during the eleven years that he devotedly, and without ambition, envy, or malice, fulfilled his monastic duties, he had no mental hallucinations, no conferences with Satan, be saw no ghosts, fantastic ogres in human shape flitting before his mind. During this time, he was not subject to frenzied paroxysms of rage and ferocity, he never dreamed of blaspheming his Maker, or of corrupting the Sacred Writings, or of defying the authority of the Church, or of setting up a new human creed and a new man-worshiping religion. He was reasonable, moderate, temperate, devout, truthful and faithful in all things. In a word, he was mentally balanced. He was healthy, and his intellectual faculties were normal.

Now let us compare this healthy state of mind, these natural and healthy mental manifestations, with those of his subsequent life, and then apply to the two groups of phenomena to your personal opinion of balanced mental health.

From an amiable, temperate, chaste, and devout man, he became violent, ferocious, intemperate, licentious, blasphemous, and bloodthirsty. From a firm, unwavering, and happy believer in the truths of the Church, he became a victim of innumerable doubts, changes, perplexities, and fierce torments. From a condition of mental tranquillity and intellectual equilibrium, he lapsed into a state of maniacal excitement, with a very great perversion of his intellectual powers and manifestations. As an innovator he habitually saw ghosts, men with tails, horns, claws, features of animals, and was pursued and tormented by these morbid fantasies.  A volume of these abnormal mental manifestations might be cited in support of our position, but we have presented a sufficient number to enable the impartial reader to form a just conclusion respecting Luther’s mental balance.

In this century, if a person published opinions which are eccentric, erratic, violate conventions and subversive of truths and doctrines which are universally accepted, he would be arraigned before the bar of public opinion and his innovations and acts subjected to the tests of reason, science, and logic. Novel ideas, vehement declaration, or the bitterest invective are not regarded as truth, argument, or sound philosophy; but stern facts and demonstrated truths are the only admitted witnesses in the intellectual courts of this practical century. Should a modern-day Luther appear and claim that through conversations with the Prince of Darkness that he had come to the conclusion that the entire world was in error and that he, and he alone, knew the truth, he would undoubtedly be committed to a mental facility for treatment. Such a person would indeed have some followers, for there is no hypothesis, however ridiculous or absurd, which will not attract disciples. Yet, its author would either be consigned to an institution, or public opinion would ridicule him into a speedy oblivion.

One might argue in favor of Luther’s sanity during his innovating career, that he often displayed great intellectual powers and great eloquence. We respond that such displays are not at all uncommon in confirmed mental illness. We often see displays of astonishing intellectual efforts exhibited in great many different aspects; but we more frequently see these displays in the exercise of the imaginative than in the reasoning faculties.

Luther was the originator and the master-spirit of the Reformation, the father of modern Protestantism and the author of the modern innovations against the ancient Church. He was the center around which vast numbers of restless, worldly, and visionary men rallied in opposition to a religion and a Church, which had been founded by Christ, and perpetuated from generation to generation up to his day. The hostility of these adversaries amounted almost to frenzy; each follower seemed to imbibe some portion of the spirit and the reckless extravagance of their master. The poison of mad fanaticism seemed to contaminate the entire sect, engendering hatred, a thirst for vengeance and blood and a kind of epidemic religious fanaticism. The absurdity and wickedness of Luther’s innovations will be readily appreciated when we remember his continual, abrupt, and radical changes of opinion, and that nearly all his first innovations perished before his own death! His original articles of faith and his original creed, which enticed so many deluded followers from the ancient faith, are now among the things of the past. Yet, their sad fruits may still be observed in the innumerable conflicting sects, in the religious distractions and hatreds, in the wide-spread infidelity, and in the bloody religious wars which have decimated and cursed the world during the past five hundred years.

We have already seen that envy was the primary exciting cause of Luther’s defection from the Church. This envy continued to grow and new seeds of evil sprang up within him and called forth in the beginning words of denunciation against a rival Dominican brother. When the attacked party retorted, new germs of evil sprang up within his breast; hatred, resentment, pride, ambition, and love of notoriety. Gradually these evil passions led him on, at times dominating him completely. These violent emotions, these conflicting passions, the encouragement and applause of corrupt men, and the glittering and carnal temptations of the world were too much for the inflammable nature of the poor monk, and demons reveled where angels once had dwelt. Luther was the unfortunate victim of a mental illness, the manifestations of which pandered to the passions of his followers, and established the lawfulness of opinions and practices in direct opposition to the teachings of Christ, His apostles, and the Church. The corrupt and licentious men of Germany, and of other countries, eagerly adopted the accommodating views and religion of this unfortunate man, because it afforded them a pretext to continue in their sinful ways.

Nearly every one of the prominent contemporary Reformers, including, Melanchthon, and Calvin, acknowledged these evil traits of Luther, and deplored the sad results which they knew must spring from them. The more cautious innovators attempted in vain to stay, or at least to modify the extravagances of their leader. Melanchthon eventually became so disgusted with the ravings and the dictatorial tyrannies of Luther, that on one occasion, at Munster, he declared, that “there were two false prophets, the Pope and Luther, but of the two Luther is the worst.”[27] Zwingli, Calvin, and others often referred to him as “the new pope.”

[1] Eberhardt, Vol. 2, p. 140. Quoting from: Joseph Lortz, Die Reformation in Deutschland (third edition: Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 1949), I, 86.

  • [2] Grisar, Martin Luther, p. 92.
  • [3] Richard P. Vaughan, S.J., Ph.D., Mental Illness and the Religious Life, (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company, 1962) p. 37.
  • [4] Vaughan, Mental Illness and the Religious Life, p. 47.
  • [5] Grisar, Luther, Vol. II, p. 85.
  • [6] Grisar, Martin Luther, p. 202.
  • [7] Laux, Church History, p. 435.
  • [8] Jean Marie Vincent Audin, History of the Life, Writings, & Doctrines of Luther, Trans. William B. Turnbull, ESQ., (London: C. Dolman) 1854, Vol. 1., P. 188
  • [9] Audin, Vol. 1, p. 388.
  • [10] O’Hare, p. 311.
  • [15] Ecclesiastes 5:4-5:

[16] Eberhardt, Vol. 2, p. 140.

  • [17] O’Hare, p. 315.
  • [18] Audin, Vol. 2, p. 265.
  • [19] Audin, Vol. 2, pp. 264-265.
  • [20] Grisar, Luther, Vol. III, pp. 259 sqq.
  • [21] Grisar, Martin Luther, p. 516.
  • [22] Grisar, Luther, Vol. VI. p. 248.
  • [23] Grisar, Martin Luther, pp. 500-501.

[24] Table Talk, p. lxxiv.

[25] Ibid.

  • [26] Audin, Vol. 1, p. 366.

[27] Grisar, Martin Luther, p. 417.

New Post

Select A Catagory