Young Man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History

by Erik H. Erikson

In this psychobiography, Erik H. Erikson brings his insights on human development and the identity crisis to bear on the prominent figure of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther.

Genres: Psychology, History, Biography, Nonfiction, Religion, Biography Memoir, Christianity

290 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 1958

About the author

Erik Erikson was a German-born American developmental psychologist and psychoanalyst known for his theory on psychosocial development of human beings. He may be most famous for coining the phrase identity crisis. His son, Kai T. Erikson, is a noted American sociologist.

Although Erikson lacked even a bachelor's degree, he served as a professor at prominent institutions such as Harvard and Yale.

Reviews

[Erik Graff · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a tremendously refreshing book to read as a supplement to coursework in the history of the reformation. Erik Erikson's first book-length psychoanalytic study of a major historical figure, Young Man Luther focuses on the very private person rather than the monk, author, translator, theologian and politician he also was. And by "private" I mean the very private, the kind of facts which the psychoanalytic tradition sees as foundational in character building and which most persons would never talk openly about except to a trusted friend or therapist.

The central difference between Lutheranism and Catholicism is the doctrine of justification. The former emphasizes grace. The latter allows for both grace and works. Much has been written about the distinction.

Erikson portrays young Luther as a constipated young monk who was forced by his condition to spend considerable amounts of time in "the tower"--the privy at the verge of the establishment. So as to use the time constructively, he would read. The matter of justification was of considerable concern to him owing, in part, to his previous history with his father and other authority figures. Luther was a bad boy. He became a monk and a scholar over the objections of his father. His mind was tortured by self-doubt and personal misgiving. Then, what he refers to as "the tower experience" occurred, i.e. his discovery in the letters of Paul, in Romans, the passage about human sin as inescapable, but . . . but divine grace being infinite. It struck him for the first time--for he had read this before, many times--that, yes, as finite beings we can never be perfect; that because of this justification can never be fully accomplished by our works; but that god freely forgives our imperfection and makes possible what we cannot.
--And then, blessed release.

Reducing the major thesis of Lutheran theology to the bowel activity of its formulator is, at first glance, a stretch, but there is something here and not only in the sense of Erikson adducing a case for his argument from the record. In fact, our lives are supported and surrounded by grace abounding. What we actually understand and accomplish is miniscule. At best, we lever events and call the resulting avalanche our accomplishment. At best, we have this vague sense of something, of a point we wish to make, then let go a torrent of words which make the point for us. Our bodies and their workings are almost entirely beyond us. Our cultures and their histories and accomplishments are embodied in habits, but barely understood. The books and the libraries which contain them "understand", but our actual consciousness is narrow, very narrow. We know this, we feel the falseness of our claims to knowledge and achievement while we are making them, but we rarely, as Luther did, call such "sin" or take such commonplaces seriously.

Not prone to disabling constipation, I did once pull my back "out" as they say, and find that one small irregularity made almost everything impossible. And I have had friends, close ones, who stuttered when they were conscious of trying to express themselves, but could speak quite clearly when inspired, when not trying consciously to do anything. These examples suggest to me something, not everything, but something, of what Luther and others think when they talk about god, about god's grace, about our utter dependence on the omnipotence of the Other and about the simple, active happiness of fools, children and saints which, for them, is proof enough.

[Cool_guy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Martin Luther, an ideal candidate for psychoanalysis: he had a horrible relationship with his Fathers (the temporal and the spiritual); he loved poop jokes; and he was a German.

[dead letter office · Rating 2 out of 5]

Psychologists who double as historians are full of crap. That doesn't mean their books aren't interesting, it just means you have to be prepared to wade through a bunch of silliness in order to get to anything worthwhile. Here's one passage that set off the bullshit-meter:

Thus, in the set of god-images in which the countenance of the godhood mirrors the human face, God's face takes on the toothy and fiery expression of the devil, or the expressions of ceremonial masks. All these wrathful countenances mirror man's own rapacious orality which destroys the innocent trust of that first symbiotic orality when mouth and breast, glance and face, are one.

Uh, yeah.

This came very highly recommended by an academic specializing in the psychology of religion. If you haven't decided to devote your life to that specialty, you might find this kinda rough.

And on that note the embargo is on! No more reading until September.

[Emily]

Summer reading circa 1986 for my high school's 11th grade "AOM" class. AOM stood for "Ages of Man", a subject which anywhere else would have been known as "history". My alma mater was a girls' school in Virginia founded in the 1920s, and the name of the class was one of the things that hadn't changed in the intervening 60 years. However, whatever the name, the history classes for juniors and seniors were taught by a man with a doctorate who believed in intellectual rigor for girls, and how. There were at least three academically weighty books we had to read that summer (the only other one I can remember was The World We Have Lost: Further Explored). What a chore it was, to get through this, but I slogged through it grimply (by which I mean grimly of course, but I like the typo -- intellectually I was limping) feeling like I had to prove it to myself and everyone else that I belonged in the Advanced Placement course. I had been let in on sufferance, and was overjoyed to join the company of my new friends -- I had only then learned to embrace being on the fringes -- who were both gloriously unconventional and academically successful. I remember the book as a dense and depressing morass, and reading about it now and seeing that it was written, in 1951, by a psychoanalyst rather than a historian, I wonder if there actually was anything of value in it. It made for a good joking reference among my friends though. We would occasionally ponder it, hand on chin, stern expression of concentration on the face, when we wanted to show each other what deep thinkers we were, so it wasn't a total loss. I got through the class well enough, if not brilliantly. It was a good year, actually one of the best.

[Josiah DeGraaf · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was pretty intrigued by the idea of psychoanalytical history when I studied it in Historiography in college. I really like history that focuses on who someone is and what their personality was like (see: Plutarch), and having heard a lot of good things about this book, was excited to get into it.

Unfortunately, however, I found this book to be rather much of a mixed bag. It was a pretty bland read to get through, I wanted to see more research behind some of Erikson's different observations, and there were enough rabbit trails and side notes that Luther's personality became rather hidden and tough to extract from this work.

A clearer writing style with better organization could have helped this work. As-is, I didn't feel like I gleaned much from Erikson (though I did gain some insights into Luther from it.)

Rating: 2 Stars (Inconsistent).

[Richard · Rating 3 out of 5]

Has the double claim to fame of giving birth to both the psychobiography genre and the scholarly interest in Luther's constipation.

[Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Given its reputation, I expected much more of the book to be dedicated to young Martin’s, erm, “breakthrough” in haec cloaca. But don’t worry! Plenty is made of the relationship between Luther’s frequent scatological remarks and Erikson’s theories of psychosexual anal expulsiveness. Despite its fundamental flaws (even a superficial critique will point out that analysis requires, you know, a conversation), Erikson examines arguably the most important historical figure of the past five centuries in an insightful light. This is a biography not of Luther as theologian, as German, as devil or saint, but as troubled young man undergoing a radical identity crisis. And indeed, Erikson has little patience for the Middle-Aged and Old Man Luther, i.e. the Reformer as self-historicized. It’s also worth noting that, for obvious reasons, theologically conservative Protestants despise Erikson for his treatment of Luther, but the author was in fact a convert to the Reformed tradition.

[Mathias · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author reduces Luther to a prominent academic similar to Freud and Nietzsche striving toward individualistic fulfillment. This is a bad individualistic analysis (in truth driven by the authors own neurosis) - the author makes claims about psychosocial context but shows no signs of understanding human sociality. He believes in the mythology of autonomy, which is NOT the case with Freud and Jung, who to a much larger extent understand sociological context albeit clothed in symbolic language

Shallow analysis, based on an inadequate anthropology, using rationalistic 'psychoanalytical' jargon without understanding the true human experience from within. Makes a tedious and frankly boring read. This somehow passes as acceptable psychology, speaking volumes to the inadequacy of the field. This author is an authority in developmental Psychology

Piaget is in comparison a much better psychologist, with his background in mysticism is better apted to understand and investigate True human experience, which ultimately is explained by social and ecological context

[Ruth]

I have been so busy with school I forgot to update this. This book was so difficult to read! Would not recommend! I did learn, however, that Martin Luther was a bit of a freak! So that's fun!

I got an 87% on my critical review :(

[Matthew Laing · Rating 3 out of 5]

Within its time and context, I can see why this was a landmark text, and performing an analytical study of a distant historical figure such as Luther is an intriguing exercise. Undoubtedly Luther is character deserving of psychological analysis - many of his biographies do this to some degree, as Luther's struggle with the church is borne out of a deeply personal crisis of identity and happiness - crises Erikson was an expert in and seems uniquely placed to discuss. Some of Erikson's speculative explorations of Luther's mind were truly fascinating - from the struggles with ethical conscious amidst a fundamentally imperfect world in a waning era of history, to some of the very base motivations of fear and hostility around authority and personal salvation.

As many of have commented however, the first weakness of this book is the historical component. Erikson is not a historian, however so much of his analysis relies on an accurate reading of history and nuanced view of the man in his times. In some places Erikson does this quite sensitively, but in others he's prone to sweeping generalizations and builds his analysis on highly speculative or faulty historical foundations.

Secondly, Erikson's narrative meanders and I feel the narrative loses focus constantly. He's prone to wander off onto tangents about the intersections between psychology and society, history, theology or biology, yet struggles I feel to really make many of these work towards the central task of exploring the case of Luther. Notwithstanding that many tangents were very interesting and insightful in their own right, the lack of coherence was frustrating.

Thirdly, part of my dislike for this work stems from an inherent skepticism about the value of psychoanalysis as it is practiced here, and that's subjective. Some of Erikson's psychoanalytical explorations I found to be needlessly dense and abstruse, and others were obscure in meaning and felt like wordy nothingness. Too often Erikson takes a small and potential innocuous aspect of Luther's life and provides two pages of soaring and florid extrapolation as to an aspect of Luther's supposed psyche. In parts I get the feeling sometimes that Erikson had already diagnosed Luther long before he began the process of conducting this analysis, such that events and ideas in Luther's life are massaged and presented in such a way as to support Erikson's contentions.

Hence, I feel what is left is a series of interesting vignettes and thoughts on Luther, history, psychoanalysis and the self, but it doesn't really add up either to a well-rounded biography of the man or a convincingly holistic psychoanalytical assessment of his character. It's rich with intelligent insight but for me loses itself along the way.

[Douglass Morrison · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Erik Erikson gave a brief rationale for writing his book, Young Man Luther, in the Preface:
• “I spoke of dimensions of lonely discovery, as exemplified by Freud, the first psychoanalyst…
• I compared Freud with Darwin, and noted that neither man had come upon his most decisive contribution as part of an intended professional design, both lived through an extended intellectual moratorium, and in both, neurotic suffering accompanied the breakthrough of their creativity…
• Luther’s specific creativity represented a medieval precursor of some aspects of Freud’s determined struggle with the father complex; even as Luther’s emancipation from medieval dogma was one of the indispensable precursors both of modern philosophy and psychology….”
Erikson went further when he outlined his views on the interaction and dynamics of ideology and identity formation. “My focus is on the ideological… In this book, ideology will mean an unconscious tendency underlying religious and scientific, as well as political thought; the tendency at a given time to make facts amenable to ideas and ideas amenable to facts. In order to create a world image convincing enough to support the collective and individual sense of identity. Far from being arbitrary or consciously manageable,… ideological simplification reveals its strength by the dominance it exerts on the seeming logic of historical events, and by its influence on identity formation of individuals and thus their ego-strength… In some periods of history, and in some phases of his life cycle, man needs a new ideological orientation as surely and as sorely as he must have air and food.” Like William James in The Varieties of Religious Experience, Erikson does not focus on the dogma of religions. Rather he views religion from the perspective of a source of identity and ideology.
Drawing on his years as a clinical psychiatrist, with a deep interest in maturation through stages and crises, such as the adolescent identity crisis, Erikson describes Luther’s unhappy childhood. He focuses on a well-reported episode of hysteria, mania, and/ or epileptic fit, in the church choir. Erikson describes Luther as a Homo religiousus, who had experienced: physical paroxysms with loss of consciousness (epileptic fits?); spiritual revelations; flashes of enlightenment; and automatic verbal utterances. Erikson goes on to address the question of whether Luther’s psychological issue was a spiritual ‘suffering of the soul’ versus an endogenous process or mental health ‘sickness of spirit’. Regardless, Erikson tells us that Luther worked through his identity crisis, in search of an ideology, or life outlook.
In seeking to resolve his ‘father complex’ with a physically abusive and authoritarian father, Erikson tells us Luther had to determine to whom (or what) he would ultimately pledge his primary obedience: father, country, God, or Pope. In the process of answering his identity question, Luther became one of the most important thought leaders of his time, precipitating philosophic and psychologic emancipations from medieval dogma.
Luther was “preparing to do the ‘dirty work of the Renaissance’, namely apply some of the individualistic principles of the Renaissance to the Church’s still highly fortified home ground - the conscience of ordinary men.” Luther developed an alternative to the negative, external conscience based on sin and punishment, namely man’s individual (internal) conscience. Erikson tells us that Luther’s ‘negative conscience’ is analogous to Freud’s conceptualization of the pressure the superego puts on the ego. Erikson compares Luther’s breakthrough (placing the onus on the individual to develop his own conscience) with the breakthroughs of several other great men, whose impacts were far more than they had originally intended:
o Darwin - his theory of evolution implied man is biologically related to animals
o Copernicus – earth is not the center of the Universe, or even our solar system
o Einstein – at the subatomic level, ‘truth’ is relative or statistical
o Freud - unconscious contents contribute to man’s conscious thoughts and desires.
Erikson compares some of the steps in Luther’s maturation which had been facilitated by his becoming a monk, specifically comparing monastic life to indoctrination. Indoctrination or ‘thought reform’ critical elements include: removal from family and community; isolation from the outer world; restriction of sensory input; lack of privacy; emphasis on brotherhood; and joint devotion to leaders. He writes that late adolescence is the ideal time for this metamorphosis, where the subject’s current identity is aggravated, and then ‘cured’ by the thought control.
A brief list of Martin Luther’s theological accomplishments includes:
• Emphasis on individual conscience prepared the way for equality, representation, and self-determination.
• The Jubilee of 1500 culminated worldwide effort to raise money for Saint Peter’s construction, by means of papal indulgences or buying credit in Purgatory and Heaven. When Luther refused to traffic in ‘deals with God’, such as papal indulgences, … “He swept off by a stroke of his hand the very notion of a debit and credit account kept with individuals by the Almighty, and stretched the soul’s imagination and saved theology from puerility.” (Erikson attributes this quote to Charles Beard)
• Translated the New Testament of the Bible from Erasmus’ Greek version into German considered by some, the apex of German literature. He also gave many of his more famous sermons in German fueling a nationalistic response to the Italian Pope.
• Rediscovery of ‘the passion of Christ’ in each individual’s inner struggles
• Marriage as an alternative to priest’s celibacy
I learned a lot from reading Young Man Luther. The book amplified many of the things I had learned from Professor Erikson’s college course, The Human Life Cycle. Much of it was consistent with what I had studied in other books written by Erik Erikson, such as Childhood and Society, Insight and Responsibility, and Gandhi’s Truth. The book further resonated with William James’ The Varieties of Religious Experience, and Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning. And I continued to learn about the unconscious contributions to creativity, as in Rollo May’s The Courage to Create, and Paul Tillich’s The Courage to Be. I recommend Young Man Luther to individuals interested in religion, history, the psychology of creativity, and the applications of psychoanalysis to subjects going through identity crises.

[Jean Wetmore · Rating 3 out of 5]

An intriguing idea. Psychoanalysis the person most responsible for the Protestant reformation. Written in the 1950's this book reflects as much the state of psychoanalysis of the time as it does the subject matter. I'd love to see a book like this rewritten with to reflect the progresses made in psychoanalysis over the past 70 years. But given that psychoanalysis was still in its early stages, it gave a good overview of Luther's psyche as understood at the time.

[Jim · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is good if you want to know how some in the psychological community view religious beliefs. It also provides some insight into the time period. Does not paint Luther in a positive light.

[YeOldeReader · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is another history book based upon psychoanalysis that failed the test of time.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

= God is Dad.

[Andrew Noselli · Rating 3 out of 5]

I felt this didn't quite qualify as being the psycho-biography of Martin Luther as to be compared to Erich Fromm's analysis of Adolf Hitler in his Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, but perhaps there is not enough primary source material to erect such a monument to the Protestant Revolution as there was to the father of Nazism. I feel a closer reading of the relevant texts could someday alleviate this important gap in our knowledge of the evolution of Christianity as the result of the protest-movement that stemmed from the image of Luther's compendious refinement of the Christian tradition of image-making and standards of emolument and dispensation. Three stars.

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good when he stays on topic and doesn't go off on tangents about Hitler or psychoanalysis that he claims will be relevant later but never brings up again. Fairly balanced when he references four other biographies written by different ideologues. Sometimes profound, sometimes arrogant opinionated.

[Jane De vries · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting to combine religion, German history and psychology, all in one short book by a famous author.

Luther's strained relationship with his Father and his inability to resolve it is a theme throughout. How many other well-known people have had to grapple with this?

[Sándor Szabó · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting book in its kind, also reaching the limits that such a work can reach.

[Pamela · Rating 3 out of 5]

Here I'm supposed to say something clever but all I can say is.. "Thank goodness. I'm done!"

[Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting book. If nothing else, a very thought-provoking look at the life of Luther and the beginnings of the Protestant reformation from a psychoanalytical-social perspective.

[Tyler · Rating 2 out of 5]

To be quite frank, this is about 90% chaff.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE FAMED DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGIST LOOKS AT THE YOUNG REFORMER

Erik Erikson (1902-1994) was a German-born American psychologist known for his theory on psychosocial development of human beings. He wrote many books, such as 'Childhood and Society,' 'Identity and the Life Cycle,' etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1958 book, "This study of Martin Luther as a young man was planned as a chapter in a book on emotional crises in late adolescence and early adulthood. But Luther proved too bulky a man to be merely a chapter. His young manhood is one of the most radical on record: whatever he became part of, whatever became part of him, was eventually destroyed or rejuvenated. The clinical chapter became a historical book." (Pg. 7)

Erikson says, "I do not mean to suggest that those who chose the monastery ... KNOW that they are marking time before they come to their crossroad, which they often do in the late twenties, belated just because they gave their all to the temporary subject of devotion. The crisis in such a young man's life may be reached exactly when he half-realizes that he is fatally overcommitted to what he is not." (Pg. 43)

He argues, "Martin must be assumed to have been at the time in the throes of a conflict which ... must have made the idea of a marital commitment repugnant to the point of open panic... when he did marry twenty years later, having in the meantime taken the vows of celibacy, broken with the Church, and set fire to the world around him, publicly proclaimed as his first and foremost reason for taking a wife that it would please his father." (Pg. 91)

Erikson observes, "As Luther was reviewing in his mind Romans 1:17, the last sentence suddenly assumed a clarity which pervaded his whole being and 'opened the door of paradise to him: '...the just shall live by faith.' The power of these words lay in a new perception of the space-time of life and eternity. Luther saw that God's justice is not consigned to a future day of judgment based on our record on earth when He will have the 'last word.' Instead, this justice is in us, in the here and now; for, if we will only perceive it, God has given us faith to live by, and we can perceive it by understanding the Word which is Christ." (Pg. 201)

He explains, "I intend to demonstrate that Luther's redefinition of man's condition---while part and parcel of his theology---has striking configurational parallels with inner dynamic shifts like those which clinicians recognize in the recovery of individuals from psychic distress. In brief, I will try to indicate that Luther, in laying the foundation for a 'religiosity for the adult man,' displayed the attributes of his own hard-won adulthood; his renaissance of faith portrays a vigorous recovery of his own ego-initiative." (Pg. 206)

While Lutheran and Reformed theologians will not necessarily agree with Erikson's interpretations, those interested in Erikson, as well as the psychology of religion, will be interested by this book.

[Tom Schulte · Rating 4 out of 5]

Among the most intriguing material in this book is when the author references his insights gathered from anthorpological assessment of Native Americans, such as:

"It is well to remember that the majority of men have never invented the device of beating children into submission. Some of the American Plains Indian tribes were (as I had an opportunity to relate and to discuss twenty years ago Childhood and Society) deeply shocked when they first saw white people beat their children. In their bewilderment they could only explain such behavior as part of an over-all missionary scheme an explanation also supported by the white people's method of letting their babies cry themselves blue in the face. It all must mean, so they thought, a well-calculated wish to impress white children with the idea that this world is not a good place to linger in, and that it is better to look to the other world where perfect happiness is to be had at the price of having sacrificed this world. This is an ideological interpretation, and a shrewd one: it interprets a single typical act not on the basis of its being a possible cause of a limited effect, but as part of a world view. And indeed, we now beat our children less, but we are still harrying them through this imperfect world, not so much to get them to the next one as to make them hurry from one good moment to better ones, to climb, improve, advance, progress."

Along with that, I have been avoiding psychoanalytical biographies considering such things as Moses and Monotheism as bordering on hubris. Getting into this work, I had no idea we could know so much in detail about an early 16th Century personage. Luther's annotated writings, early biographies, financial records, first person accounts and other primary sources complete a picture of the life of this important figure largely from his abruptly redirected university career to leading an out of control reactionary reform movement with a fully violent insurgency.

Admittedly, when I came across a phrase like "transfer neurosis" I let my eyes drop down to the next paragraph seeking more details on Luther's life and times. However, with Luther's confessed and documented obsession with diabolical derrieres, his own disordered bowel movements, and a mind or times given to anal metaphors it does appear subjecting his life to Freudian interpretation was bound to happen and I commend the author in his restraint in this direction.

[Jeremy Allan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Young Man Luther was the subject of my first real "aha!" moment during my university years, reading it in my freshman year at Kenyon College for a course in early modern European history with Professor Reed Browning. I remember thinking at the time, "Oh yes! This is what I have been missing! This is why I came to Gambier, Ohio, to study!" It was a feeling I have sought to recreate ever since, with mixed success, and so it now strikes me as almost odd that I haven't re-read the book until now.

I did not find the passage that I remembered bowling me over. That's fine. It was still an excellent experience going back into Erikson's very intelligent work, both for the discoveries that I had failed to make when I was 18 years old, but also for where it didn't strike me as profoundly on my second look. I think what interested me most, this time, was coming to see why Young Man Luther might be so important to an undergraduate student. It has value in its own right as a psycho-historical exercise, but it appeals specifically to those who would like to see themselves as "still becoming." It is, after all, a psychological study of a young great man, before he becomes a great young man (this is a version of Erikson's own words), and how many overweening undergrads would resist finding a whole array of uncanny resemblances between their lives and revolutionary thinker like Martin Luther? Even the modest among us would still, at that age, be prone to saying, "well Luther and I would have one or two things in common," I think.

So I'm amused with myself, impressed once again with Erikson, and as grateful as ever to Reed Browning, who has remained a model for me in my professional life, and to whom I owe this book, along with much more.

[Michael Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Young Man Luther is a brilliant psychoanalysis of Luther, at once scholarly, readible, and enlightening. There were "laugh out loud" moments reading Luther's war of words with the Pope, an authority figure who was an easy match to his imposing beast of a father. Erikson's exploration of Luther, his lifelong struggles to find "secure attachment", meaning, and any kind of real peace or psychological health, weighs heavily on the reader. Luther manages to alter history in spite of the burden of a life of heartache, anger, and mental illness. One fascinating section compares and contrasts Luther with Hitler: what made each one tick?

[Sir Michael Röhm · Rating 4 out of 5]

This psychoanalytic analysis of young Martin Luther provides valuable insights into the man's own thought processes. What emerges is a complex young man whose own fears of The Father - both earthly and Heavenly - led to his famed theological break from Roman Catholicism and the Spiritual Father of the Western world.

He comes across as all too human - not the "Here I Stand" hero beloved of Reformers, but a young man working out his own issues, who inadvertently inspired a theological - and political and economic - revolution that he never really wanted and often doubted - and let down.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I first read this book many years--when I was a teenager, I believe, or an undergraduate. It's a dated book, and many critics have pointed out serious historical errors. Erikson, after all, was a trained psychoanalyst, not a historian. It's still an extremely compellling read, though, and very provocative.

[Mandy · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really well-written and fascinating look at one of the major figures in Western history. If you like psychology and are at all fascinated by the sweeping religious changes in history, read this book.

[Carol · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is fascinating and really not only about Luther but about the way all of our various stages of development play into the formulation of our adult faith. An outstanding book. I am very grateful that I finally got around to reading it!