Full Text for Biographies of Luther: Converging on a Whole Man (Text)

CONCCIRDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Volume 58: Number 1 JANUARY 1994 The Symposia of Concordia Theological Seminary (January 1994) ............................................................................ 1 Proclaiming Life in Death: The Funeral Sermon Donald L. Deffner .................................................................... 5 Biographies of Luther: Converging on a Whole Man Terry D. Thompson .................................................................... 25 ............................................................................... Book Reviews 39 Indices to Volume 57 (1993) Author Index .............................................................................. 69 Title Index ................................................................................. 71 Book Review Index ................................................................... 73 Biographies of Luther: Converging on a Whole Man Terry D. Thompson The quincentennial of Martin Luther's birth in 1983 prompted many additions to the already enormous corpus of works about Luther, a somewhat ironic tribute given that Luther had not wished for any great notoriety.' In libraries around the world, some of the workers who placed new books about the reformer on the already full shelves undoubtedly wondered, "Who was this Luther?" This question is far more insightful than most of those asking it would realize, for while the libraries of the world have no shortage of books about Luther's thoughts, words, and actions, there is a distinct shortage of comprehensive biographies that include useful assess- ments of Martin Luther the man. "Who was Luther?" is therefore an especially appropriate question to ask when surveying the new titles which mention him since, for those in the community of Reformation historians, Luther is often the figure around whom a whole career revolves. His identity and personality are of central concern for those scholars who approach Luther with a combination of the interest which we have in a family member and the scrutiny which we apply to a political candidate. Their concern, supported by the assumption that know- ledge of an individual's personality is a key to an understanding of his actions, makes the person's identity a most appropriate and necessary topic indeed. A second appropriate question is where these new titles stand with respect to the historiography. Do they include new views, new approaches, or new analyses? To cut to the heart of both questions, are these dozen or two new books on Luther justified? James M. Kittelson has suggested that the two characteristics of Martin Luther's life that a biography must treat are his accessible personality and his public career, which transcended his time and justifies scholarly interest in Luther today.2 Earlier biographical treatments of Luther, usually slighting one or the other of these characteristics, have brought four perspectives regarding Luther into the mainstream of present-day th~ught.~ Their writers most often drew caricatures of Luther as the heroic Protestant theologian or German nationalist leader, Luther as the instrument of the devil, Luther as the capitalist tool, or Luther as the psychological cripple. 26 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Those biographies that portrayed Luther as a Protestant hero, from John Matthesius' late sixteenth-century hagiography through a number of more recent works, emphasized Luther's theology at the expense of his humanity. While perhaps useful for a Lutheran church that defined itself in terms of doctrine, they contributed much less of value to historians. The Luther-as-German-hero variant concentrated on Luther's German ethnicity at the expense of both his Christianity and sound scholarship, perhaps reaching its odious depths with Nazi Joseph Goebbels and William M. McGovern's American reply, From Luther to Hitler.4 With their own set of priorities in mind, Roman Catholic biographers adopted the theologi- cal model but turned Protestant scholarship on its head and posited a Luther who was a creation of the devil (or who, at least, had completely misinterpreted the medieval church and its theology). From Cochlaeus in the sixteenth century to Hartmann Grisar in the twentieth, they pictured a twisted Luther bent on the destruction of the one true church.' Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, two of the most influential thinkers of the nineteenth century, each prompted a new perspective on Martin Luther. Mam and his colleague Friedrich Engels portrayed Luther as a tool of the rising capitalist order. They and their followers, including modern playwright Dieter Forte, viewed Luther's life through a class-oriented economic prism and not surprisingly saw a Luther who, motivated by economics and loyalty to the princes, betrayed both Miintzer's revolt of the people and the gospel to which he had professed allegian~e.~ These Marxist portrayals followed the earlier theological perspectives in ignoring Luther's humanity. This humanity finally surfaced in those works that attempted to apply the tools of psychology to Luther's life. The most notorious of these works, Erik Erikson's "psychobiography" and John Osborne's play Luther, did address Luther's personality, but even in them Luther was a caricature, albeit one of a different s01-t.~ In these historically inaccurate works he appeared as an emotional and psychological cripple, driven by cruel parents into a kind of half-humanity, condemned to perpetual adolescent behavior ("acting out" his psychoses in present-day language). These writers slighted or eliminated any intellectual development in Luther's life and portrayed his theology as simple-minded substitutions of the Biographies of Luther 27 church for his father and Mary for his mother. Unsatisfactory as these works are to the historian, their impact on historiography has been positive, for the confrontation with these ugly pictures of the reformer spurred Luther scholars to write well-researched and more balanced portraits of Luther the man. The result of these fresh encounters with Luther the man, as seen in the most recent group of biographies, is striking: Luther biogra- phers are converging, each from their own perspective, on a truly remarkable sixteenth-century man. There remain marked differences in outlook; some works are certainly more readable and usefu1,than others. But careful reading of modern-day representatives of each of the four approaches outlined above makes it clear that a new Luther is emerging-neither flawless nor incorrigible, simultaneously transcendent and human. Present-day agendas remain in these works, but the opinions of the writers no longer overpower their subject. Gerhard Brendler's book, written in the DDR before unification, provides a useful illustration of the convergence? Frequent and distracting digressions into Marxist interpretations of medieval history detract from the continuity of Brendler's narrative, and the book contains a number of unsupported assertions. Also his attempt to prove that Luther's societal association overwhelmed the gospel rests on the flawed assumption that Luther analyzed his world in terms of economic classes that had not even emerged at the time? Here Brendler even contradicts himself, as he already devoted an entire chapter to the importance of the Bible for Luther, referring to the word as Luther's "second self' and noting its precedence over all else in the reformer's life.'' Brendler nonetheless makes substantial advances beyond the earlier, narrower Marxist interpretations. For example, he commended Luther's accomplishments in triggering change, even referring to Luther's transcendence." And while the terms of Brendler's analysis do not lend themselves to a comprehen- sive look at Luther the man, there are outlines of his attitudes and views at several points. Brendler's work is perhaps the strongest illustration of the convergence of scholarly biographies, since his work comes from what was probably the most rigid of the four perspectives and he wrote under a government that still enforced 28 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY ideological uniformity. English Roman Catholic scholar John M. Todd's recent life of Luther similarly moves beyond his tradition's former orthodo~y.'~ The book admirably meets his stated goal of trying to present Luther the man, with a thorough picture of a principled Luther, driven by a passion for God and blessed with great integrity, intelligence, and sensitivity.13 Todd occasionally leaves one wishing for a more thorough chronology of events, but this weakness does not substan- tially detract from either his effective portrayal of Luther's many roles or the over-all rhythm of the narrative. Leaving no doubt that he believes Luther to have been a medieval theologian and not a humanist, Todd interestingly placed Luther's loss of hope of reconciliation with Rome later than most writers place it-as late as the mid-1530's.14 In other passages as well, Todd appears to minimize the distance between Luther and the ideals of Roman Catholicism while simultaneously detailing the failings of the church that Luther fought. In the end, while he criticizes the new evangeli- cal church for doctrinal rigidity, he strongly endorses the reformer's work: ". . . the changes were qualitative and substantial. The 'Myth' began again to look less like a myth and more like the Gospel of the New Testa~nent."'~ Mercifully, no one has repeated Erikson's effort at a "psycho- biography." Several of the recent scholarly biographies have concentrated on Luther's humanity, providing well-documented and well-researched refutations of Erikson. One is Todd's, which was discussed above. Two other biographies that use a roughly chrono- logical approach to reveal Luther the man are those of Mark U. Edwards, Jr., and H. G. ~ai1e.l~ These writers use the tools of sound scholarship to depict the older Luther as a whole man whose actions and personality shaped and were shaped by the events of his life. It is important to note that both of these works suggest that Luther continued to adapt to new situations well into his fifties. Neither Edwards nor Haile found a Luther whose development stopped at adolescence, as the "psychobiographers" did. Edwards and Haile each organizes his treatment of Luther's later life (after 1530 for Edwards, after 1533 for Haile) thematically, with the themes selected so as to follow each other chronologically. Biographies of Luther 29 Edwards states that he has no particular agenda for his book aside from providing a better understanding of Luther in his time. While he thus eschews any discussion of the transcendent aspects of Luther's life, his careful treatments of Luther's response to such developments as illness, political resistance, and secular authority still illustrate the transcendent aspect in Luther. The nature of Luther the man is Edwards' main topic, however, and his depiction of a Luther whose actions (even those at which the modem reader may blanch) were logical given the situation is a strong challenge to the viewpoint of Erikson and Osborne. Edwards posits that the violent language of Luther's latter years, while not new and not exclusive to Luther, was partly due to two things: Luther's disap- pointment with the course of the Reformation and his belief that he had been misunderstood. On those latter points Haile's equally able treatment of the topic differs. Referring to Luther as a "grand personality," Haile shares Edwards' view of a productive, vibrant, and intellectually capable older Luther, but fails to find the disappointment and feelings of misunderstanding that Edwards does." Haile instead finds an older Luther who cherishes life, a man who jokes and drinks with his friends, loves his wife and children, and takes joy in simple plea- sures. Haile's book discusses in a matter-of-fact way Luther's belief that the devil was an active participant in the world (the normative belief of Luther's time) without giving this issue the stress that Edwards' book does. Thus, the two differ on some details, but not on the key issue; in the view of both scholars, Luther was a well- adjusted, whole man. A third book that concentrates on Luther's psyche is that of Heiko Oberman, but his work is something else altogether.'* Idiosyn- cratically organized, it is a collection of detailed thoughts about Luther and not a biography. If one wishes for a book that allows the devil a large place in Luther's life, Oberman's is the work of choice. Oberman maintains that Luther lived his entire life standing between God and the devil (and, more plausibly, between the medieval era and the Enlightenment). These two adversaries even battled over interpreting Luther's life. Oberman seems unsure of whether Luther was a reformer, perhaps because of his belief in an 30 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY apocalyptic Luther.19 Furthermore, Oberman's statements that Luther's views came from life make the book's brief treatment of that life curious. The crippling difficulty in Oberman's work, however, lies in his view that the devil was a figure of overwhelm- ing strength to Martin Luther. Why would a Luther who believed that his efforts were doomed to fail have devoted such effort to fighting for renewal? Why would Luther, who believed the devil incapable of killing him, think the devil capable of killing the ~eformation?~' Some of the book's passages, notably those discuss- ing baptism, are helpful; but, in any case, Oberman's effort does not belong in a list of biographies of Martin Luther. Not surprisingly, the largest number of biographies of Luther come out of the Lutheran tradition. Martin Brecht, James M. Kittel- son, Bernhard Lohse, and Walther von Loewenich are four Lutheran scholars, all German save Kittelson, whose recent treatments of the reformer most clearly descend from the traditional Lutheran perspective. Each of these men, however, extends this perspective in his own way. Martin Brecht's titanic three-volume treatment addresses nearly every aspect of Luther's life in copious and sometimes almost overwhelming detaiLZ1 It will likely remain the definitive scholarly treatment of Luther's entire life for the next fifty years, and deserves to do so. Brecht's work also addresses nearly every scholarly conflict surrounding Luther's life. A short but effective critique of the Marxist view that Luther's social background determined the course of his life opens Road to Reformation. It states that Luther's vocation as a monk, his work as a professor, and his theology had far more impact on his life than did his ancestry." The book also includes a masterful refutation of Erikson's theory that a dysfunc- tional early home life profoundly affected Luther's theology. Luther's parents were decent people, his home life was normal for the time, and Luther's relationship with his mother and father had no demonstrable effects beyond the ordinary on his relationship to God, according to Bre~ht.'~ A pivotal thesis that moves Brecht's work beyond the earlier Lutheran tradition is that Luther's personality is essential to understanding his theology. This fact is evident even in Luther's Biographies of Luther 3 1 early university years, says Brecht: "Luther's personality, his cause, and his manner of presenting it united in a sort of charisma which hardly a single one of his hearers was able to evade."24 This union of personal identity, theology, and faith extended to his reform program as well and, while some criticized Luther for not compro- mising on this program, such a compromise was not possible: ". . . this accusation overlooks the normative character of the conception Luther had been developing ever since the indulgence controversy and the argument over the question of the pope, one which he could have abandoned only at the expense of surrendering his identity as a theologian and a Chri~tian."~~ Luther's theological views and reform ideas had emerged from his involvement in life, and they in turn became an integral part of his life and identity. It is with this thesis that Brecht-as well as Kittelson and Ed- wards-supplies a fm refutation of those who would charge Luther with "inconsistency" for slight changes in his views from one time to another. Luther's words, actions, and identity came out of a life of constant adaptation to new and complex situations. Only the smallest of minds could have or would have concerned themselves with minor "inconsistencies" while living a life such as Luther's. Luther himself frequently noted that he was inconsistent in small things. Yet his willingness and ability to adapt the principles of the gospel to different situations shows the transcendent nature of his life and an astonishing consistency regarding those things which he regarded as being of ultimate significance. Unlike such earlier Luther biographers as Roland Bainton, these modern authors depict Luther's personality, actions, and thought as a whole, rather than attempting to divide the man; and they posit no changes in the essential nature of Luther as he aged.26 Brecht writes of a Luther who lived life in a practical, earthy way. His book shows a man who experienced life's joys and sorrows and offered practical counsel out of that experience. Luther's own Agechtungen during his monastic years allowed him to appreciate the trials of others, and advice such as he gave to his melancholy friend Waller (avoid loneliness, play, and drink heavily) shows that empathy, according to Brecht." Clearly this Luther is not an ivory- tower theologian or a stainless saint. 32 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Nor is Luther anything other than human in James M. Kittelson's writing. His biography, written for non-specialists by a scholar using the tools of his trade, is a compact, densely-packed look at the whole life of the reformer. It is especially clear regarding Luther's theology: "The gospel and its defense meant everything to L~ther."~' While Kittelson does not devote as much space to exploring Luther's emotional makeup as do Todd and Haile, he carefully notes that Luther's classmates did not recall Luther as being unusual and that the mutual respect and love found in the marriage of Martin and Katie was exceptional for the time.29 Kittelson gives special attention to Luther's relationship with the magistrates and his work building the evangelical church. He places the irreconcilable break with Rome earlier than does Todd, sug- gesting that Roman Catholic unwillingness to consider the evangeli- cal message ended any possibility of reconciliation by the time of the Diet of Augsburg Diet (1530). The book meets Kittelson's own stated objective of treating Luther's accessible personality in conjunction with his transcendent public career, and it does so without being unrnanageably long. It is an ideal introduction to Luther. Walther von Loewenich's biography provides one last illustration of the comprehensive nature of the modem works being considered here.30 Written primarily for theologians, it also includes a well- rounded portrayal of Luther's personality. As does Brecht, von Loewenich notes Luther's pastoral nature: "An entire chapter could be written about Luther as a pastor. His entire career had a pastoral character . . . The secret of Luther's proficiency in pastoral care was that he himself had known what it was like to experience attacks of despair (Anfe~htung)."~' Note is also taken of the earthy, practical nature of Luther's care: "Luther began his conversations with those who were ill by addressing them in purely human terms. Only later did he attempt to give them spiritual Von Loewenich's tone is more distinctly religious than the other scholars considered here, even the Lutherans. He appeals, for example, to his audience to carry on Luther's prophetic work, stating that Luther has a message for the church and the world today. Yet Luther's less palatable side receives mention even in this Lutheran Biographies of Luther 3 3 ecclesiastical history. Von Loewenich does not ignore Luther's writing against the Jews, and he soundly condemns it: "Certainly it was on theological grounds that Luther began to oppose the Jews, but these grounds were not sound. It is a deplorable blot on his life that he used these grounds to disseminate such vulgar propaganda against the Jews, and that he did it with such ~ehemence."~~ In another departure from the traditional stance of Lutheran writers, von Loewenich has kind words for the medieval church. He notes that, along with some questionable manifestations of piety, there were noteworthy efforts at education and an intensity of religious belief which pervaded all of society; and he credits the work of Roman Catholic scholars in exploring these matters.34 Although outside the terms of this essay, Bernhard Lohse's recent work on Luther deserves special mention.35 It is a kind of encyclo- pedia of Luther, organized with Germanic thoroughness. These are sample entries: "3.4. Were the Ninety-Five Theses Really Posted on the Church Door?" "5.9.6. Luther Has No Theory of the Inevita- ble Decline of Civilization." The book includes a survey of scholarly opinions regarding almost every conceivable aspect of Luther studies as well as a topically organized treatment of Luther's life, actions, and writings, including brief surveys of the available editions of those writings. Difficult to read as a narrative because of its format, it is nonetheless a useful reference regarding specific topics and a handy guide to further reading. Even in, moreover, this encyclopedic format, Lohse still believed Luther's personality worthy of inclusion, a sharp contrast with Paul Althaus' similar works of roughly three decades ago. Thus, Lohse provides yet another example of the increased interest in the man in studies of Luther.36 These biographies suggest four conclusions. In the first place, contemporary scholars, at least those at the highest strata of the profession, have come to recognize the importance of understanding Luther's personality to a sound interpretation of his life and impact. Luther's personal identity is not the paramount concern of all these scholars, but even works with their primary emphasis on specific aspects of Luther's career (Brecht on his theology and Edwards on his polemical writing, for example) devote significant space to his personality. Also, regardless of perspective, these authors are 34 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY unafraid of asking difficult questions about Luther. Like a family that truly loves and respects its members, they refuse to accept uncritically the actions and words of the one to whose study they devote so much time. Secondly, these scholars show a reluctance to use Luther to foist a contemporary agenda upon the reader. Their perspectives are frequently visible (especially in Brendler and von Loewenich), but phrases such as "just as in the present day" are thankfully absent. Disagreements remain, and undoubtedly present-day struggles lurk beneath the surface of the narratives, but there are few explicit editorial comments. They appear to believe that the transcendent aspects of the reformer's life will be apparent so long as they retell his life with care, attempting to discern the meaning of Luther's words and actions for his own time. Thirdly, the words of these writers suggest a general willingness to appreciate scholarship of high quality regardless of perspective. This trend is most explicitly apparent in Todd's appreciation of Lutheran scholarship and in von Loewenich's commendation of Roman Catholic studies. It also appears more subtly in such areas as the various treatments of the Peasants' War. A shared interest in illuminating Luther's personality, a reluctance to argue present-day agendas through Luther studies, and an appreciation of the work of those who approach the reformer via other routes-40 these three trends imply that current studies of Luther form a flavorless mass of nearly identical non-opinions? The answer to this question is an emphatic "no" which points toward a fourth conclusion-namely, that ecumenical tendencies, at least in studies of Luther, have not led scholars to a least common denomi- nator of non-controversial but shallow writing. On the contrary, the new willingness to appreciate and utilize the best in the work of others and the belief that Luther's transcendence can speak for itself have brought a wealth of useful biographies to the student of Luther. There are differences among them. Even the most casual reader can readily observe that Kittelson and Oberman disagree on whether Luther was a reformer and that Brecht and Todd differ regarding the time beyond which reconciliation with Rome was impossible for Luther. Looking a bit more deeply, one realizes that Haile and Biographies of Luther 35 Edwards hold dissimilar views regarding Luther's degree of satisfaction with the state of the evangelical church and that von Loewenich and Brendler are quite disagreed on the authority of the Bible. A complete listing of variations such as these would be well beyond the endurance of even the most interested reader. Four examples are sufficient, however, to show that these recent interpre- tations of Luther's life differ, just as their predecessors did. But there is a difference in their divergencies, however, and in this difference lies the contribution of contemporary scholars to historio- graphy. Their willingness to look beyond partisan differences and their interest in exploring Luther's personality have brought a new vigor to their portraits of the reformer. Luther is no longer two-dimensional (whatever those dimensions may have been). In the depth of his rediscovered humanity we can more easily see why this friar held so much of Europe's attention for thirty years and why his personality had such an affect on those with whom he had contact. It was not simply his ideas, as many have said, nor was it a mere coincidence of circumstances. It was a Luther possessed of a rare union of thought and personality and the way in which he acted in response to his times that reshaped his world and made him a man for all time. The best of these works-especially Todd's, Brecht's, Kittelson's, and von Loewenich's-makes this combination especial- ly clear, but all show some recognition of it. These biographies still differ in their interpretations, but they are now converging on the same remarkable man. Walther von Loewenich concluded the essay that opens his book with the following paragraph: Indeed, Luther was not a book that could be read easily; he was a human being with his contradictions. It is no wonder that he is so controversial. To see Luther from only one perspective is to do him an injustice. .The concern to achieve an objective judgment must not decrease, but those who only observe Luther from a cool distance will never be able to grasp the richness of his being. No matter how we approach him, many puzzles will remain. How could it be otherwise? Life cannot be captured in stereotypes. The person of Luther belongs to history, but whoever approaches 36 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY him is touched by life.37 This paragraph may serve equally well as the conclusion to this essay. Endnotes Martin Luther, A Sincere Admonition by Martin Luther to all Christians to Guard against Insurrection and Rebellion, Luther's Works, American Edition, ed. Helmut T. Lehmann, tr. W. A. Lambert, 55 vols. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1962), 45, pp. 70-71. James M. Kittelson, Luther the Reformer (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1986), p. 16. The rough historiographical sketch of earlier works that follows is not comprehensive. Luther's enormous impact has meant that almost every strain of Western thought has claimed itself to be either the heir of the "true" Luther or a complete repudiation of Luther. These innumerable variants include the Enlightenment Luther, the Pietist Luther, the Mystic Luther, and many others. Four more complete essays on the topic are in Eric W. Gritsch, Martin: God's Court Jester (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983); Bernhard Lohse, Martin Luther: An Introduction to His Life and Work, tr. Robert C. Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986); and Mark U. Edwards, Jr., in Reformation Europe: A Guide to Research, ed. Steven Ozment (St. Louis: Center for Reformation Research, 1982). 4. William M. McGovern, From Luther to Hitler (Cambridge, Massaschusetts: Riverside Press, 1941). 5. Hartmann Grisar, Luther: His Life and Work, tr. E. M. Lamrnond (St. Louis: Herder and Company, 1930). 6. Dieter Forte, Martin Luther und Thomas Miintzer oder Die Einfiihrung der Buchhaltung (Berlin, 1971). 7. Erik Erikson, Young Man Luther (New York: Norton, 1962), and John Osborne, Luther (New York: New American Library, 1963). Biographies of Luther 37 Gerhard Brendler, Martin Luther: Theology and Revolution, tr. Claude A. Fost~r, Jr. (New York: Oxford University Press, 199 1). Ibid., especially p. 372. Ibid., chapter 2, pp. 53ff. and p. 74. Ibid., p. 372. John M. Todd, Luther: A Life (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1982). It should be noted that Joseph Lortz' work during the 1960's was an early and important Roman Catholic scholarly analysis of Luther. Lortz did not completely exculpate Luther, suggesting that Luther saw only one side of the medieval church, but he did allow Luther some legitimacy. See Lortz, "The Basic Elements of Luther's Intellectual Style," Catholic Scholars Dialogue with Luther, ed. Jared Wicks (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1970). Todd, p. 373. Ibid., p. 275. Ibid., pp. 372-373. Mark U. Edwards, Jr., Luther's Last Battles (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1983). and H. G. Haile, Luther: An Experiment in Biography (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1980). Haile, p. 3. Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, tr. Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). Ibid, especially pp. 151, 12, and 79. Martin Luther, Table Talk, ed. Theodore Tappert, in Luther's Works: American Edition, ed. Jaraslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehmann, 55 vols. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1955-1986), 54, p. 23. 38 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483-1521, tr. James L. Schaaf (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985); Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, I521 -1532 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990); and Martin Luther: Die Erhaltung der Kirche, 1532-1546 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1987). Brecht, Road to Reformation, p. 6. Ibid., pp. 7ff. Ibid., p. 296. Ibid., p. 469. Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (Nashville: Abingdon Publishing House, 1950). Brecht, Shaping and Defining, p. 379. Ibid., p. 272. Ibid., p. 46, p. 282. Walther von Loewenich, Martin Luther: The Man and His Work, tr. Lawrence W. Denef (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1986). Ibid., pp. 358-359. Ibid., p. 358. Ibid., p. 352. Ibid,. p. 25. Bernhard Lohse, Martin Luther: An Introduction to His Life and Work, tr. Robert C. Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, trans. Robert C. Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), and The Ethics of Martin Luther, 1972. Interestingly, Althaus and Lohse were both translated into English by the same man. Walther von Loewenich, p. 20.