Luther Behind the Curtain

In Exsurge Domine, the bull in which Pope Leo X formally condemns Martin Luther’s heretical teachings, the pope refers to Luther as “the wild boar from the forest” who seeks to destroy the vineyard, “an image of the triumphant Church” entrusted to Peter.

The comparison of Luther to a wild boar is appropriate for two reasons: (1) wild boars are aggressive, short-tempered, and easily provoked, and they will not hesitate to attack humans, and (2) they are “potential carriers of viral, bacterial, and parasitic diseases that can affect livestock, wildlife, and humans.” Luther was certainly aggressive and short-tempered, and he didn’t hesitate to verbally attack anyone who would stand in his way or demonstrate his errors. Moreover, the new doctrines he spread can reasonably be said to have made many people spiritually ill.

Not surprisingly,Exsurge Domine was ill received by Luther. Though the bull was intended as a corrective measure to bring Luther to his senses, he dug in his heels:

This bull condemns Christ himself. It summons me not to an audience but to a recantation. I am going to act on the assumption that it is spurious, though I think it is genuine. Would that Charles [V, Holy Roman Emperor] were a man and would fight for Christ against these Satans. But I am not afraid. God’s will be done. . . .

I am sending you a copy of the bull that you may see the Roman monster. The faith and the Church are at stake. I rejoice to suffer in so noble a cause. I am not worthy of so holy a trial. I feel much freer now that I am certain the pope is Antichrist.

With Leo’s “wild boar” imagery in mind, it would be helpful to revisit, in detail, the kind of person Luther was. I am not looking to do an extensive psychological treatment of the man, but I do think it’s productive to give the reader a working view of Luther because it sets his doctrines in their proper context: a dark heart gives rise to dark ideas. Even a cursory examination of Luther will show that his teachings are an inevitable extension of his rebellious and caustic character and his emotional instability.

One Lutheran observed,“His personality dare not be discounted in assessing how he came to his formulation of the biblical message.” I agree completely. Taking this observation to heart, let’s have another look at Luther’s personality.

We can allow for Luther’s fallen humanity¬¬—after all, we all possess it—but we also must acknowledge that his unstable temperament, volatile nature, and chronic venting of seething anger against the things he perceived as problematic were serious character flaws, not the traits of a saintly reformer.

Any treatment of what he taught, then, must be understood in light of the man. And if his doctrines are more easily determined and defined by his personality than by a proper understanding of Scripture, then we should account for that fact.

Protestant Objection: The claim that Luther was insane, possessed, or something to that effect has certainly been raised before. Protestants don’t find it a convincing reason to reject his teachings. After all, even insane people can speak the truth.

Catholic Response: Granted, insane people can say things that are true, but we would expect this to be in the form of the occasional nugget of truth or isolated insight, not an entire theological system. We would reasonably expect Luther, as an alleged reformer, to lead by setting a virtuous example in his teachings, speech, and behavior.

Want to know more about Luther? Grab your copy of this eye-opening book today!

Did you enjoy this content? Order your copy of Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work: 25 Practical Reasons to Reject the Doctrine of “Bible Alone” today!