What do you think?
Rate this book
Wereld in wanorde Maarten Luther en de geboorte van de Reformatie
In Wereld in wanorde maken we kennis met Maarten Luther in de cruciale eerste jaren van diens kruistocht tegen Rome. Craig Harline toont ons Luther als briljant, maar ook grillig en zelfingenomen monnik, eindeloos tobbend over zijn zielenheil en de verderfelijkheden van zijn tijd. We volgen hoe Luthers opvattingen hem in conflict brengen met geleerden, priesters, bisschoppen, vorsten en uiteindelijk de paus. En hoe dit conflict uitmondt in een van de belangrijkste keerpunten in de wereldgeschiedenis: de Reformatie.
Craig Harline beschrijft niet alleen de religieuze discussies, maar ook het politieke gekonkel en de vele bondgenootschappen die zich rondom en tegen Luther vormden. Door uit te gaan van het moment waarop Luther handelde in plaats van de betekenis die zijn daden achteraf bleken te hebben, krijgt Luthers optreden zijn oorspronkelijke gewicht terug. Wereld in wanorde brengt ons zo dicht bij zijn dramatische leven, dat je bijna voelt hoe onzeker de afloop ook voor Luther zelf lange tijd moet zijn geweest.
Craig Harline beschrijft niet alleen de religieuze discussies, maar ook het politieke gekonkel en de vele bondgenootschappen die zich rondom en tegen Luther vormden. Door uit te gaan van het moment waarop Luther handelde in plaats van de betekenis die zijn daden achteraf bleken te hebben, krijgt Luthers optreden zijn oorspronkelijke gewicht terug. Wereld in wanorde brengt ons zo dicht bij zijn dramatische leven, dat je bijna voelt hoe onzeker de afloop ook voor Luther zelf lange tijd moet zijn geweest.
334 pages, Paperback
First published October 3, 2017
28 people are currently reading
718 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
July 22, 2017
Craig Harline is more than a great historian. He's a fantastic storyteller. His new book about Martin Luther is a real page-turner. I didn't expect to be using adjectives like gripping, heart-pounding, and funny, but here I am. It's a perfect introduction to "Brother Martin" for beginners, but I imagine even longtime specialists on the Reformation will genuinely enjoy and benefit from this freshly-told narrative. That's hard to do, and Harline seems to pull it off with ease. Highly recommended!
March 4, 2018
I won this book in a goodreads drawing.
Since October, 2017, marks the 500 anniversary of Luther nailing his theses on the church door, there are several books published on the man and his influence. This has to be considered one of the best.
The book really gives you a sense of the man, and what he was trying to accomplish, while at the same time, giving a sense of the historical influences.
A great book for anybody interested in the Protestant reformation.
Since October, 2017, marks the 500 anniversary of Luther nailing his theses on the church door, there are several books published on the man and his influence. This has to be considered one of the best.
The book really gives you a sense of the man, and what he was trying to accomplish, while at the same time, giving a sense of the historical influences.
A great book for anybody interested in the Protestant reformation.
December 2, 2019
A great introduction to the Reformation period in Europe and the life and work of Martin Luther. If you want to understand the history of western civilization, you have to learn the history of Christianity. To that end, Harline's book is great because it's written for a lay audience - you don't have to have a background in medieval history or a sophisticated understanding of the Holy Roman Empire to follow the story. I'm eager to continue learning more about the period and how religion and politics shaped European and North American history.
August 12, 2019
Craig Harline's "A World Ablaze: The Rise of Martin Luther and the Birth of Reformation" is a rollick that reads like a novel because that is what it is. Author Craig Harline is a certified academic but this highly entertaining work ought never to have been published by Oxford University Press which markets itself as a publisher of academic history.
Harline constantly takes the reader inside the head of Luther describing his emotional and mental reactions to events in a way that historical sources simply do not permit. An historian can only note what has been committed to paper or what witnesses subsequently reported. Unlike a novelist or a dramatist, a historian cannot authoritatively state what was going on in the subject in the subject's mind at a specific point in time which is what Harline does constantly. However as the number of academic works on Luther is, as Harline states, "overwhelming", Harline was arguably justified in his loopy approach.
Harline has a great deal of sympathy for his subject. This could be due to the fact that Harline belongs to the Mormon Church which in the final analysis is just a rigorist Protestant offshoot. Being a Mormon, Harline naturally agrees with Luther's critique of the Catholic Church. To Luther, theology should be based on the Bible not pagan philosophy. There was no scriptural justification for the Papacy, the priesthood, the monastic vocation, or conducting services in Latin. On the seven sacraments only, Luther accepted only baptism, holy communion and penance. However, as a Mormon Harline would not subscribe to the doctrine of predestination which is the centrepiece of Luther's theology. In short Harline admires in Luther for his energy and enthusiasm rather than the soundness of any his conclusions.
Luther had a great passion for preaching and debating his ideas with his students. However, he loved to be right. It would have gone against his basic personality to accept the doctrines of the Church or the dictates of the pope. Only his ideas were right. Harline argues that it was for the this reason that Luther was unable to make an alliance with Zwingli and why the Lutheran Church fractured into schisms from the time it was born.
"A World Ablaze " is without question first-rate entertainment for someone who has read several overview works on the Protestant Reformation. For someone, who has read more extensively on the topic, it is potentially highly irritating.
Harline constantly takes the reader inside the head of Luther describing his emotional and mental reactions to events in a way that historical sources simply do not permit. An historian can only note what has been committed to paper or what witnesses subsequently reported. Unlike a novelist or a dramatist, a historian cannot authoritatively state what was going on in the subject in the subject's mind at a specific point in time which is what Harline does constantly. However as the number of academic works on Luther is, as Harline states, "overwhelming", Harline was arguably justified in his loopy approach.
Harline has a great deal of sympathy for his subject. This could be due to the fact that Harline belongs to the Mormon Church which in the final analysis is just a rigorist Protestant offshoot. Being a Mormon, Harline naturally agrees with Luther's critique of the Catholic Church. To Luther, theology should be based on the Bible not pagan philosophy. There was no scriptural justification for the Papacy, the priesthood, the monastic vocation, or conducting services in Latin. On the seven sacraments only, Luther accepted only baptism, holy communion and penance. However, as a Mormon Harline would not subscribe to the doctrine of predestination which is the centrepiece of Luther's theology. In short Harline admires in Luther for his energy and enthusiasm rather than the soundness of any his conclusions.
Luther had a great passion for preaching and debating his ideas with his students. However, he loved to be right. It would have gone against his basic personality to accept the doctrines of the Church or the dictates of the pope. Only his ideas were right. Harline argues that it was for the this reason that Luther was unable to make an alliance with Zwingli and why the Lutheran Church fractured into schisms from the time it was born.
"A World Ablaze " is without question first-rate entertainment for someone who has read several overview works on the Protestant Reformation. For someone, who has read more extensively on the topic, it is potentially highly irritating.
April 13, 2022
Harline writes an easy to read story on Maarten Luther. Easy to read but also covering the issues he had with Church at the time. The book does not end up in theological detaisl but covers the main themes and the personal issues Luther faced at the time and also his doubts.
As protestants some of his views are very familliair to me but at the time these points were under heavy discussion. The church had spent hundreds of years of coming to the basic dogmas and Luther went back to the basics for these dogmas and discovered where they were build on. He took the bible as basic for his belief system and was convinced that the bible was misinterpreted. Nowadays we understand that also his views are debatable since nobody can exactly know what God really meant with the words in there. Apparantly the exact truth and knowledge is not the essence of life as God intented it. Probably the way we live our life and how we love one another is more important. It took me of a lot of time to realize this. I think the Reformation in which Luther played such an important role helped me to understand this better.
As protestants some of his views are very familliair to me but at the time these points were under heavy discussion. The church had spent hundreds of years of coming to the basic dogmas and Luther went back to the basics for these dogmas and discovered where they were build on. He took the bible as basic for his belief system and was convinced that the bible was misinterpreted. Nowadays we understand that also his views are debatable since nobody can exactly know what God really meant with the words in there. Apparantly the exact truth and knowledge is not the essence of life as God intented it. Probably the way we live our life and how we love one another is more important. It took me of a lot of time to realize this. I think the Reformation in which Luther played such an important role helped me to understand this better.
September 11, 2023
A very riveting read! Hairline paints a very vibrant and personal picture of Martin Luther and the controversy that would lead to the reformation.
June 2, 2018
I learned quite a bit about Martin Luther and the time and conversations and situations that led to the start of the Reformation. It's interesting to see what internal conversations and thoughts led Brother Martin to his further study and ultimate beliefs. There was a lot of bravery and confidence needed to stand up for his interpretations and writings. Ultimately, this is a book about searching for truth, I think. Here are a few quotes I liked:
"The young travelers were hungry and thirsty--yes of course for knowledge, which was why they'd set out on this long journey in the first place, but at the moment they'd have gladly settled for a little food and drink instead (p. 3)."
"'What do they think about this Luther in Switzerland?' the knight continued (p. 4)."
"What in the world had happened? Maybe a few weeks of law were enough to convince Martin that he hated the subject. Or maybe he was trying to escape a marriage father Hans had arranged for him. But it was mostly, said Martin, because God gave him no choice. By that, he could have meant how seriously he'd started to worry about the state of his soul (p. 13)."
"No matter what Brother Martin did, his sense of sin wouldn't leave him. He tried to keep every single rule, and when he broke a rule he more than made up for it with severely penitent deeds, but all the...floors he scrubbed...and begging he did...still weren't enough to make him feel like he'd ever be rid of his sins, and thus be righteous, or justified, before a perfect and righteous and therefore surely demanding God. Even when he did something right on the outside, there was still something wrong with him inside, usually a lot of pride at having done the right thing (p. 15)."
"Brother Martin kept on studying, though, because he was still sure that he would find answers in theology (p. 17)."
"Searching for answers obviously wasn't just some intellectual exercise for Brother Martin, but the ultimate definition of a matter of life and death...and salvation (p. 18)."
"Brother Martin started to believe Paul: no wonder he felt lost and unable to please God, he realized--nobody could! It was even necessary to feel lost and unworthy, so that when God's grace came you understood to your bones that it was He who did all the saving, not you. You had no say in your own salvation. All you could do was get yourself sufficiently humble to recognize your sinful state, and see how badly you needed God's grace (p. 19)."
"Brother Martin learned the new tradition of reading the Bible in its original languages to get as close to the source as possible (p. 21)."
"God made you righteous through your faith (p. 22)."
"Dr. Martin had to admit that in his early days as a shepherd he hadn't known all that much about indulgences, mostly because he thought them so trite and usually just ignored them. But when he realized how popular they were among his flock, and how they so easily led people into thinking that their salvation was now a sure thing, he started paying attention (p. 35)."
"Punishment helped you see how much you needed God, in who you really ought to put your trust instead of in some indulgence (p. 36)."
"He hadn't been the first to discover justification by faith, so he wasn't the first to say some unflattering things about indulgences (p. 37)."
"'Don't write against the pope! It won't be tolerated (p. 39)!'"
"Make no mistake about it, a little bravery was absolutely necessary here (p. 39)."
"Critics of the 95 theses would soon say he really believed them all, and wasn't just tossing out ideas for discussion anymore (p. 44)."
"In the end, it didn't really matter much whether Dr. Martin nailed or glued his new theses to the castle-church door. What mattered was whether anyone who mattered in the world would notice or care about them (p. 46)."
"Before climbing into the pulpit, he usually organized the points he wanted to make in thesis-like fashion (he couldn't help it), but he would never just read them out or decide in advance exactly how to say things. Instead, he found that he spoke best if he prepared well on a subject but then just let God speak through him or, as he put it: if he just tried to get out of God's way (p. 66)."
"He wasn't against good deeds...they should all do good deeds to fulfill their punishments...but they should remember that those deeds couldn't possibly pay back God or save them...They should also quit trying to escape their punishments, or satisfaction, by buying indulgences, because the suffering that came with punishment turned them to God (p. 67)."
"The bishop of Bradenburg was telling him to be quiet, Tetzel was holding disputations against him and threatening to start a big fire with Dr. Martin in it, and Dominicans were raging against him in pulpits all over German lands, and now in Rome too (p. 69)."
"Truth could only be grounded in (1) the Holy Scriptures, or (2) the writings of the church fathers, or (3) reason and experience. In that order (p. 76)."
"Brother Martin couldn't see humans ever getting love (or any other virtue) right on their own, without God's help...he became convinced that faith in God's saving grace was the real key to salvation: when people got that, then they could truly love (p. 79)."
"The summons from the pope had stunned Brother Martin when it arrived on August 7, ordering him to appear in Rome within 60 days to answer for his writings (p. 84)."
"'Even if their flattery and power should succeed in making me hated by all people, enough remains of my heart and conscience to know and confess that all for which I stand and which they attack, I have from God (p. 85)."
"Of course the Bible was supreme, they said: the question was, who had the supreme right to interpret it (p. 87)?"
"'Show me how I may understand this doctrine differently, instead of compelling me to revoke those things which I must believe according to the testimony of my conscience (p. 98).'"
"Frederick stuck to his original position: he would not arrest Luther...until he was proven guilty. Yes, as a Christian prince, he would protect the church, but he must be sure that Luther had harmed it (p. 117)."
"Eck wanted to dispute these topics because he was sure they would lead to the topic he wanted to dispute with Luther most of all: the authority of the pope (p. 127)."
"Yes, the pope was important in the church, Dr. Martin had no problem admitting that. But he was already sure that the pope wasn't what most people claimed he was--more specifically, his office had never even been established by God (p. 128)."
"Bohemians claimed to understand scripture better than not only popes, but councils too. Wasn't Luther saying the same thing (p. 139)?"
"Dr. Martin was one of those troubled by the pope's failings and excesses, but unlike most others he didn't focus on them...since every single person was a sinner. No, it was the pope's doctrine, and the practices that resulted from it, that bothered Dr. Martin most (p. 151)."
"He was going to keep saying and writing what he knew was true, instead of dancing carefully around (p. 152)."
"The cardinals finally compromised: Luther would be summoned to Rome instead of merely arrested, but he would get no hearing (p. 160)."
"Dr. Martin didn't want revolt or violence against the pope, or some war of German independence from him, as some people were calling for. Instead he wanted Germans to show their greatness by humbly accepting God's Roman chastisement and repenting--and taking charge of their own church (p. 171)."
"Anything with Brother Martin's name on the cover now had an excellent chance of becoming controversial no matter what the subject (p. 172)."
"Luther had to be arrested if he didn't recant, and his books had to be burned. No more hearings were necessary, because Luther had already been judged in absentia in Rome, and the emperor and other German princes were sure to agree with that judgment (p. 179)."
"Prince Frederick had continued to protect Dr. Martin from Rome, but even more than in the past they both had to wonder just how long that protection could last (p. 185)."
"Stop thinking about how terrifying hell and sin and death were and...keep their minds instead on Christ (p. 188)."
"Dr. Martin was puzzled more than once by the popularity of his books. The only way he could explain it was, as usual, by God. For some reason, he had thrown Dr. Martin 'into this game' of spreading the gospel not just by mouth by in print. And so he would go along with it, even if he sometimes didn't want to, and even if he had to fight the Devil all along the way (p. 192)."
"His whole purpose, in all his speaking and writing, was to honor God and instruct the faithful (p. 221)."
"It was nothing new to appeal to conscience. But conscience didn't mean his own personal opinion, or even the voice of God inside, as it would one day mean. No, to Brother Martin, and others too, it meant the battleground where God and the Devil fought, and in his case his conscience had been conquered by God's Holy Word. The Devil had been forced to flee. That was why he couldn't recant (p. 223)."
"Books were his only pulpit now (p. 239)."
"As sure as he was about how things ought to go in the church, Dr. Martin was always pained when they went otherwise, especially as Christianity, and even the reformers themselves, seemed to be dividing into numerous rival groups (p. 264)."
"His biggest regret...was that he hadn't been found worthy to shed his blood for Christ, as he'd always expected he would. And his biggest worries were the usual: had he been wrong? And was God really good, specifically to him (p. 264)?"
"Dr. Martin also started something entirely new for him: being a husband and father. His future wife Katharina von Bora had fled to Wittenberg in 1523 with eight other nuns, and Dr. Martin found husbands for all of them except her. She finally declared that she would only marry either Dr. Martin or Nicholas von Amsdorf, and Dr. Martin decided he would give it a try himself, saying very unromantically that he did it to make his father happy, to spite the pope and the Devil, and to practice what he preached before he was martyred, which was sure to happen very soon.... He and Katharina...started adding children to their life (six in total, two of whom died young). He was terrified about the first pregnancy, because some said a two-headed monster was bound to emerge from a marriage between a former friar and former nun (p. 268)."
"The young travelers were hungry and thirsty--yes of course for knowledge, which was why they'd set out on this long journey in the first place, but at the moment they'd have gladly settled for a little food and drink instead (p. 3)."
"'What do they think about this Luther in Switzerland?' the knight continued (p. 4)."
"What in the world had happened? Maybe a few weeks of law were enough to convince Martin that he hated the subject. Or maybe he was trying to escape a marriage father Hans had arranged for him. But it was mostly, said Martin, because God gave him no choice. By that, he could have meant how seriously he'd started to worry about the state of his soul (p. 13)."
"No matter what Brother Martin did, his sense of sin wouldn't leave him. He tried to keep every single rule, and when he broke a rule he more than made up for it with severely penitent deeds, but all the...floors he scrubbed...and begging he did...still weren't enough to make him feel like he'd ever be rid of his sins, and thus be righteous, or justified, before a perfect and righteous and therefore surely demanding God. Even when he did something right on the outside, there was still something wrong with him inside, usually a lot of pride at having done the right thing (p. 15)."
"Brother Martin kept on studying, though, because he was still sure that he would find answers in theology (p. 17)."
"Searching for answers obviously wasn't just some intellectual exercise for Brother Martin, but the ultimate definition of a matter of life and death...and salvation (p. 18)."
"Brother Martin started to believe Paul: no wonder he felt lost and unable to please God, he realized--nobody could! It was even necessary to feel lost and unworthy, so that when God's grace came you understood to your bones that it was He who did all the saving, not you. You had no say in your own salvation. All you could do was get yourself sufficiently humble to recognize your sinful state, and see how badly you needed God's grace (p. 19)."
"Brother Martin learned the new tradition of reading the Bible in its original languages to get as close to the source as possible (p. 21)."
"God made you righteous through your faith (p. 22)."
"Dr. Martin had to admit that in his early days as a shepherd he hadn't known all that much about indulgences, mostly because he thought them so trite and usually just ignored them. But when he realized how popular they were among his flock, and how they so easily led people into thinking that their salvation was now a sure thing, he started paying attention (p. 35)."
"Punishment helped you see how much you needed God, in who you really ought to put your trust instead of in some indulgence (p. 36)."
"He hadn't been the first to discover justification by faith, so he wasn't the first to say some unflattering things about indulgences (p. 37)."
"'Don't write against the pope! It won't be tolerated (p. 39)!'"
"Make no mistake about it, a little bravery was absolutely necessary here (p. 39)."
"Critics of the 95 theses would soon say he really believed them all, and wasn't just tossing out ideas for discussion anymore (p. 44)."
"In the end, it didn't really matter much whether Dr. Martin nailed or glued his new theses to the castle-church door. What mattered was whether anyone who mattered in the world would notice or care about them (p. 46)."
"Before climbing into the pulpit, he usually organized the points he wanted to make in thesis-like fashion (he couldn't help it), but he would never just read them out or decide in advance exactly how to say things. Instead, he found that he spoke best if he prepared well on a subject but then just let God speak through him or, as he put it: if he just tried to get out of God's way (p. 66)."
"He wasn't against good deeds...they should all do good deeds to fulfill their punishments...but they should remember that those deeds couldn't possibly pay back God or save them...They should also quit trying to escape their punishments, or satisfaction, by buying indulgences, because the suffering that came with punishment turned them to God (p. 67)."
"The bishop of Bradenburg was telling him to be quiet, Tetzel was holding disputations against him and threatening to start a big fire with Dr. Martin in it, and Dominicans were raging against him in pulpits all over German lands, and now in Rome too (p. 69)."
"Truth could only be grounded in (1) the Holy Scriptures, or (2) the writings of the church fathers, or (3) reason and experience. In that order (p. 76)."
"Brother Martin couldn't see humans ever getting love (or any other virtue) right on their own, without God's help...he became convinced that faith in God's saving grace was the real key to salvation: when people got that, then they could truly love (p. 79)."
"The summons from the pope had stunned Brother Martin when it arrived on August 7, ordering him to appear in Rome within 60 days to answer for his writings (p. 84)."
"'Even if their flattery and power should succeed in making me hated by all people, enough remains of my heart and conscience to know and confess that all for which I stand and which they attack, I have from God (p. 85)."
"Of course the Bible was supreme, they said: the question was, who had the supreme right to interpret it (p. 87)?"
"'Show me how I may understand this doctrine differently, instead of compelling me to revoke those things which I must believe according to the testimony of my conscience (p. 98).'"
"Frederick stuck to his original position: he would not arrest Luther...until he was proven guilty. Yes, as a Christian prince, he would protect the church, but he must be sure that Luther had harmed it (p. 117)."
"Eck wanted to dispute these topics because he was sure they would lead to the topic he wanted to dispute with Luther most of all: the authority of the pope (p. 127)."
"Yes, the pope was important in the church, Dr. Martin had no problem admitting that. But he was already sure that the pope wasn't what most people claimed he was--more specifically, his office had never even been established by God (p. 128)."
"Bohemians claimed to understand scripture better than not only popes, but councils too. Wasn't Luther saying the same thing (p. 139)?"
"Dr. Martin was one of those troubled by the pope's failings and excesses, but unlike most others he didn't focus on them...since every single person was a sinner. No, it was the pope's doctrine, and the practices that resulted from it, that bothered Dr. Martin most (p. 151)."
"He was going to keep saying and writing what he knew was true, instead of dancing carefully around (p. 152)."
"The cardinals finally compromised: Luther would be summoned to Rome instead of merely arrested, but he would get no hearing (p. 160)."
"Dr. Martin didn't want revolt or violence against the pope, or some war of German independence from him, as some people were calling for. Instead he wanted Germans to show their greatness by humbly accepting God's Roman chastisement and repenting--and taking charge of their own church (p. 171)."
"Anything with Brother Martin's name on the cover now had an excellent chance of becoming controversial no matter what the subject (p. 172)."
"Luther had to be arrested if he didn't recant, and his books had to be burned. No more hearings were necessary, because Luther had already been judged in absentia in Rome, and the emperor and other German princes were sure to agree with that judgment (p. 179)."
"Prince Frederick had continued to protect Dr. Martin from Rome, but even more than in the past they both had to wonder just how long that protection could last (p. 185)."
"Stop thinking about how terrifying hell and sin and death were and...keep their minds instead on Christ (p. 188)."
"Dr. Martin was puzzled more than once by the popularity of his books. The only way he could explain it was, as usual, by God. For some reason, he had thrown Dr. Martin 'into this game' of spreading the gospel not just by mouth by in print. And so he would go along with it, even if he sometimes didn't want to, and even if he had to fight the Devil all along the way (p. 192)."
"His whole purpose, in all his speaking and writing, was to honor God and instruct the faithful (p. 221)."
"It was nothing new to appeal to conscience. But conscience didn't mean his own personal opinion, or even the voice of God inside, as it would one day mean. No, to Brother Martin, and others too, it meant the battleground where God and the Devil fought, and in his case his conscience had been conquered by God's Holy Word. The Devil had been forced to flee. That was why he couldn't recant (p. 223)."
"Books were his only pulpit now (p. 239)."
"As sure as he was about how things ought to go in the church, Dr. Martin was always pained when they went otherwise, especially as Christianity, and even the reformers themselves, seemed to be dividing into numerous rival groups (p. 264)."
"His biggest regret...was that he hadn't been found worthy to shed his blood for Christ, as he'd always expected he would. And his biggest worries were the usual: had he been wrong? And was God really good, specifically to him (p. 264)?"
"Dr. Martin also started something entirely new for him: being a husband and father. His future wife Katharina von Bora had fled to Wittenberg in 1523 with eight other nuns, and Dr. Martin found husbands for all of them except her. She finally declared that she would only marry either Dr. Martin or Nicholas von Amsdorf, and Dr. Martin decided he would give it a try himself, saying very unromantically that he did it to make his father happy, to spite the pope and the Devil, and to practice what he preached before he was martyred, which was sure to happen very soon.... He and Katharina...started adding children to their life (six in total, two of whom died young). He was terrified about the first pregnancy, because some said a two-headed monster was bound to emerge from a marriage between a former friar and former nun (p. 268)."
June 13, 2018
I absolutely loved Craig Harline's memoir of his mission in Belgium in Way Below the Angels, and I hoped he had written more. It is funny, moving, and honest about the spiritual growth and trials built into serving a mission. It turns out that he is a history professor at BYU now, and he just came out with a new biography of Martin Luther. I liked his remarks on what Mormons could take from Luther's story (you know, the traditional narrative that the Reformers were nobly defying the dark ages when truth seekers were repressed and the common man didn't have direct access to the word of God ultimately preparing the way for the Restoration):
Interviewer: So for Latter-day Saints who are looking to interpret the Reformation in the context of their faith and in the context of this general narrative that we have about the Restoration of the gospel in 1830, what would you say is the most historically responsible way to do so?
Harline: Well, I don’t even know that I have a particular way except to say that it really strikes me that what Luther was against is what many Mormons might be for. That kind of upsets the whole narrative, right? It kind of upsets this idea. I remember when I was a kid — and this really got me interested in the Reformation — when I was 12, and I went to the visitor’s center in Salt Lake, and they had this exhibit basically on Christian history and the Mormon view of it. There was Jesus, then here were some ancient Christians, then here were these hooded, shrouded figures — the medieval monks, and all the sudden here were Luther and Calvin and these other Reformers bringing the world closer to truth.
But the truth — if you believe in Luther’s truth — is quite against this idea of being saved by doing everything you can. It’s quite against that. He believes with Paul, it’s either grace or works. It cannot be a combination. It has to be one or the other, and he’s sure it’s grace because no human can do enough — or do anything, in fact — to save themselves. He would never allow for any kind of infusion of: “Oh, maybe a few works are necessary” or the classic Catholic view — if you want to get into it a little more, which is — as Augustine said — “You do enough to get what’s called an operative grace. You have enough good within you to get this operative grace. When you arrive at operative grace, then you get the grace of God that allows you to become saved.” It gives you this kind of perfection that you need or whatever.
Turning to the topic of Martin Luther, I haven't had much experience with Martin Luther other than that traditionally told in the apostasy/restoration narrative. He is mentioned briefly in Preach My Gospel:
After centuries of spiritual darkness, truth-seeking men and women protested against current religious practices. They recognized that many of the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel had been changed or lost. They sought for greater spiritual light, and many spoke of the need for a restoration of truth. They did not claim, however, that God had called them to be a prophet. Instead, they tried to reform teachings and practices that they believed had been changed or corrupted. Their efforts led to the organization of many Protestant churches. This Reformation resulted in an increased emphasis on religious freedom, which opened the way for the final Restoration.
and
To reform is to make changes to something in order to improve it. The term reformers refers to those men and women (such as Martin Luther, John Wycliffe) who protested the practices of the existing church, which they felt needed to be reformed.
I was also intrigued when Luther made a brief stint in a book in a German class on justice I took during my undergraduate degree. The book was entitled Michael Kohlhaas. The plot centers around who is wronged by a local count, and he takes justice into his own hands slaughtering the counts entire household. During his trial, Martin Luther counsels with him:
“Terrible and incomprehensible man,” said Luther, gazing at him. “When thy sword hath inflicted on the squire the most frightful vengeance that can be conceived, what can induce thee to press for a sentence against him, the sharpness of which, if it should take effect, would inflict a wound of such slight importance?”
Kohlhaas answered, while a tear rolled down his cheek: “Revered sir, the affair has cost me my wife. Kohlhaas would show the world that she fell in the performance of no injustice. Concede to my will on these points, and let the tribunal speak. In every other matter that may come under discussion, I yield.”
“Look,” said Luther, “what thou askest, supposing circumstances to be such as the general voice reports, is just; and if thou hadst endeavoured, without revenging thyself on thine own account, to lay thine affair before the elector for his decision, I have no doubt that thy request would have been granted, in every point. But all things considered, wouldst thou not have done better, if, for thy Redeemer’s sake, thou hadst forgiven the squire, taken the horses, lean and worn-out as they were, mounted them, and ridden home upon them to fatten them in their own stable at Kohlhaasenbrück.”
Now, to the book itself.
Young Luther's perfectionism
The first thing you learn about Luther that Harline outlines is his overscrupulousness:
And so when the friars sang Psalm 22 in choir, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Brother Martin really meant it. He suffered from what the professional religious called the “bath of hell,” or overscrupulousness, a sort of occupational hazard for people whose full-time job was to look inside and find sin. To Brother Martin, it was like fishing in a barrel, and so he exasperated his confessors more than most. They tried telling him that the big pile of sins he was always confessing were fake sins, and that next time he should come with some real sins that actually needed forgiving. Still, he found it hard to believe that any sin was small. After all, God was perfect, and the Bible commanded him to be perfect, and the constitution of the Observant Augustinians said that someday he would actually be able to obey every single requirement perfectly. Maybe he still just wasn’t trying hard enough.
He doesn't tie all the strings, but he uses this as an interpretive lens for all the doctrinal positions he develops later in life. The reason he rejects the role of works in salvation is due to his fear that he could never do enough. Funnily enough, Mormonism started with similar fears about personal salvation. Joseph Smith's account doesn't directly relate his concerns about the state of his soul prior to his First Vision (it does say that his "mind was called up to serious reflection and great uneasiness"), but the Church's video captures it really well when his little brother asks "What does saved mean?" and Joseph responds "I wish I knew myself!" After his First Vision though, he does become very concerned about his standing before God:
During the space of time which intervened... I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God. In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. A disposition to commit such was never in my nature. But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been. But this will not seem very strange to any one who recollects my youth, and is acquainted with my native cheery temperament.
In consequence of these things, I often felt condemned for my weakness and imperfections; when, on the evening of the above-mentioned twenty-first of September, after I had retired to my bed for the night, I betook myself to prayer and supplication to Almighty God for forgiveness of all my sins and follies, and also for a manifestation to me, that I might know of my state and standing before him; for I had full confidence in obtaining a divine manifestation, as I previously had one.
The similarity of the two is uncanny. Where Martin Luther turned to continued study in his castle tower, Joseph Smith turned to prayer. And where Martin Luther's seeking salvation led him to a doctrine centered on grace, Joseph Smith led him to a doctrine centered around covenants.
The matched ills of absolute authority and public sentiment
The other strand throughout the book that captured my attention is the very apparent dichotomy between the supremacy of the Pope and the increasing cacaphony of voices in the public square who disagree with him. I found this discussion very relevant to questions of personal freedom and authority in the form of the priesthood within Mormonism. You can just replace "Pope" with "Prophet" and "Martin Luther" with "Denver Snuffer" or "The September Five" or "Michael Quinn," and many of the verbal exchanges would sit well with either.
There were weaknesses on both sides of the dispute. I think anyone today would bristle a little when the Pope's defenders insist on the Pope's unconstrained authority. Tetzel, the famous seller of indulgences, challenged Luther when he argued that the Pope couldn't sell guaranteed forgiveness of sins without any actual change of heart or acts of penance. He shot back:
wholeheartedly defending the church’s current practices around indulgences and painstakingly refuting all of Luther’s claims: he was wrong about many things, they declared, but especially about limiting the authority of the pope, and in hinting that maybe there wasn’t really a purgatory, and in suggesting that a practice allowed by the pope wasn’t by definition good theology.
Mormons too insist that a practice is "by definition good theology" because it came from the Prophet. Why try to argue when you already know it comes from the Prophet who was called by God? Missionaries are counseled in Preach My Gospel to resolve thorny issues this way as taught by President Benson:
“… All objections, whether they be on abortion, plural marriage, seventh-day worship, etc., basically hinge on whether Joseph Smith and his successors were and are prophets of God receiving divine revelation. …
“… The only problem the objector has to resolve for himself is whether the Book of Mormon is true. For if the Book of Mormon is true, then Jesus is the Christ, Joseph Smith was his prophet, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, and it is being led today by a prophet receiving revelation.
“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand”
By insisting on the absolute rightness of authority, the Pope's defenders ultimately become extreme utilitarians: instead of considering whether peddling freedom from guilt is morally wrong, they are more concerned whether they will have enough money to build St. Peter's cathedral and pay off the archbishop's debts. Do we not also enter into morally shaky ground when we are more concerned with the number of baptisms we get or the number of lessons we teach rather than the spiritual welfare of those we are called to serve?
The other thing that struck me was the vicious response of the Pope's defenders. They weren't leaving any bridges unburned in their attempts to defend orthodoxy, ultimately inflaming the problem rather than calming it. Johann Eck had previously been a friend of Luther's, but he was almost cruel in the way he lashed out at Luther once he published his theses. Luther was hurt with that coming from a close friend. Eck responded: “Does Luther really believe that I could be his friend when he fights against the unity of the church?” I have seen similar tensions in disagreements within Mormonism, and I don't think it should have to be that way.
I'm not uncritical of Luther either. Where the Pope's defenders' weakness was an overzealous defense of absolute authority, Luther's was a growing feeling of acclaim that built as he published more and more scandalous material. I felt that his attitudes changed and became more hardened as he got more attention from the public. Harline writes:
But he was thoroughly stunned by another and totally unexpected response: the enthusiasm (and sometimes alarm) that came from hundreds of other people who had somehow managed to get their hands and eyes on a copy of the theses. How had it happened, when he’d sent out only a few?
He was surprised at first, but he came to like his celebrity status. The printing press was the 16th century's version of Facebook by the looks of it. Once his ideas caught on he begins sharpening them:
He decided in the Explanations not just to add his long proofs to the theses but to rewrite some of the theses themselves and make them even sharper than before, which couldn’t help but increase suspicions that he really did believe what the theses were saying, and also make him seem even more critical of indulgences, and the pope, than he was already suspected of being. Thesis 49 in the Explanations, for instance, no longer said that indulgences were useful under the right conditions but instead that they were downright dangerous and “directly contrary to the truth.” Thesis 50 no longer said that the pope would rather have St. Peter’s burn than that his flock be robbed, but instead that “indulgences are the most worthless of all possessions of the church” and “deserve to be cursed.” And 56 through 68 no longer just redefined the treasury of merits but denied that saints had any surplus merits to hand out at all.
This reminded me of a few now-famous Mormons as they came into the spotlight, names like Josh Weed and John Dehlin who keep blogs and podcasts. Both of these examples had tones that shifted from a more conservative view to an increasingly hostile and argumentative tone over time.
Another point: Luther moved the argument away from the more insulated arena of academia to the public square. This was at first unintentional: his disputations had been sent to a few bishops and professors for examination. But some monk thought they sounded so good, he couldn't help but "post them on his own wall" and eventually he got thousands of shares and retweets. This changed the ball game from an obscure disagreement among academics to an outright rebellion. "Once Brother Martin willingly printed that sermon and took the disputing outside the usual academic and churchly forum, he’d crossed the proverbial Rubicon and in his critics’ eyes lost his usual professorial right to dispute."
Luther further seemed to be unaware of the consequences of openly confronting the Pope. An innocent enough disagreement on the doctrine of indulgences seems fair enough, right? We as Mormons can agree to disagree with our leaders on some matters of doctrine. But this early on, Luther couldn't seem to foresee the likelihood of schism.
Not only that, but insisting that the Bible was above the pope, the way Luther constantly did, could get people thinking that everybody was free to interpret the Bible as they pleased, and that the interpretations of saintly doctors and even of the pope himself weren’t to be trusted! “All Christendom will come into spiritual danger when each individual believes what pleases him most,” Tetzel had already warned.
Finally, Luther also seemed to feel that if he just explained his views well enough, it would all clear up. After defying the Pope's authority to issue indulgences, he sent him a long 100+ page document going into extreme detail to back up his arguments. He thought, "Surely a work this thorough would clear up everything, and convince especially the Pope of his good intentions." Reason enough isn't everything, and it makes Luther seem a little naive, as are many well-intentioned political reformers in our own day.
The Church is big enough to contain multiple views
One writer who kept coming to mind as I read Luther's biography was G. K. Chesterton. Chesterton, a Catholic convert, wrote a few biographies himself, including one on St. Francis and another on St. Thomas, both of whom were known by Luther in his own day. Chesterton stressed the idea of catholicism within Catholicism: that the Church was big enough to contain multiple viewpoints, and that's what gives it endurance and flexibility to last through centuries:
St. Francis was so great and original a man that he had something in him of what makes the founder of a religion. Many of his followers were more or less ready, in their hearts, to treat him as the founder of a religion. They were willing to let the Franciscan spirit escape from Christendom as the Christian spirit had escaped from Israel. They were willing to let it eclipse Christendom as the Christian spirit had eclipsed Israel. Francis, the fire that ran through the roads of Italy, was to be the beginning of a conflagration in which the old Christian civilisation was to be consumed. That was the point the Pope had to settle; whether Christendom should absorb Francis or Francis Christendom. And he decided rightly, apart from the duties of his place; for the Church could include all that was good in the Franciscans and the Franciscans could not include all that was good in the Church.
Every heresy has been an effort to narrow the Church. If the Franciscan movement had turned into a new religion, it would after all have been a narrow religion. In so far as it did turn here and there into a heresy, it was a narrow heresy. It did what heresy always does; it set the mood against the mind.
Luther didn't seem to appreciate this idea, and didn't think that reform could come from within the Church, like his contemporary Erasmus. But all the fault can't perhaps be laid at his feet. Another thought on heresy comes from another favorite author, the Russian Orthodox Christian Nikolai Berdyaev. He remarked on how "heresy hunters" can also contribute to schism:
A fanatic of orthodoxy who denounces heresies and exterminates heretics has lost the vital fullness and harmony of truth, he is possessed by one emotion only and sees nothing but heresy and heretics everywhere. He becomes hard, forgets about the freedom of the spirit and has but little attention to bestow upon men and the complexity of individual destinies. Heaven preserve us from being obsessed by the idea of heresy! That obsession plays an enormous part in the history of Christianity and it is very difficult to get rid of it. A conviction has been bred for centuries that a religious fanatic, who mercilessly denounces heresies and heretics, is more religious than other men, and those who think that their own faith is weak respect him. In truth, however, a religious fanatic is a man who is obsessed by his idea and completely believes it, but is not in communion with the living God. On the contrary he is cut off from the living God. And for the sake of the fulness of divine truth, for the sake of freedom and love and communion with God, it is essential to uproot in oneself the evil will to denounce heresies and heretics. A heresy should be opposed by the fullness of truth and not by malice and denunciations. Fanatical denunciations of heresies sometimes assume the guise of love and are supposed to be inspired by love and pity for heretics. But this is hypocrisy and self-deception. Heresy hunters simply flatter themselves and admire their own orthodoxy...
Read the rest at https://historyengineers.wordpress.co...
Interviewer: So for Latter-day Saints who are looking to interpret the Reformation in the context of their faith and in the context of this general narrative that we have about the Restoration of the gospel in 1830, what would you say is the most historically responsible way to do so?
Harline: Well, I don’t even know that I have a particular way except to say that it really strikes me that what Luther was against is what many Mormons might be for. That kind of upsets the whole narrative, right? It kind of upsets this idea. I remember when I was a kid — and this really got me interested in the Reformation — when I was 12, and I went to the visitor’s center in Salt Lake, and they had this exhibit basically on Christian history and the Mormon view of it. There was Jesus, then here were some ancient Christians, then here were these hooded, shrouded figures — the medieval monks, and all the sudden here were Luther and Calvin and these other Reformers bringing the world closer to truth.
But the truth — if you believe in Luther’s truth — is quite against this idea of being saved by doing everything you can. It’s quite against that. He believes with Paul, it’s either grace or works. It cannot be a combination. It has to be one or the other, and he’s sure it’s grace because no human can do enough — or do anything, in fact — to save themselves. He would never allow for any kind of infusion of: “Oh, maybe a few works are necessary” or the classic Catholic view — if you want to get into it a little more, which is — as Augustine said — “You do enough to get what’s called an operative grace. You have enough good within you to get this operative grace. When you arrive at operative grace, then you get the grace of God that allows you to become saved.” It gives you this kind of perfection that you need or whatever.
Turning to the topic of Martin Luther, I haven't had much experience with Martin Luther other than that traditionally told in the apostasy/restoration narrative. He is mentioned briefly in Preach My Gospel:
After centuries of spiritual darkness, truth-seeking men and women protested against current religious practices. They recognized that many of the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel had been changed or lost. They sought for greater spiritual light, and many spoke of the need for a restoration of truth. They did not claim, however, that God had called them to be a prophet. Instead, they tried to reform teachings and practices that they believed had been changed or corrupted. Their efforts led to the organization of many Protestant churches. This Reformation resulted in an increased emphasis on religious freedom, which opened the way for the final Restoration.
and
To reform is to make changes to something in order to improve it. The term reformers refers to those men and women (such as Martin Luther, John Wycliffe) who protested the practices of the existing church, which they felt needed to be reformed.
I was also intrigued when Luther made a brief stint in a book in a German class on justice I took during my undergraduate degree. The book was entitled Michael Kohlhaas. The plot centers around who is wronged by a local count, and he takes justice into his own hands slaughtering the counts entire household. During his trial, Martin Luther counsels with him:
“Terrible and incomprehensible man,” said Luther, gazing at him. “When thy sword hath inflicted on the squire the most frightful vengeance that can be conceived, what can induce thee to press for a sentence against him, the sharpness of which, if it should take effect, would inflict a wound of such slight importance?”
Kohlhaas answered, while a tear rolled down his cheek: “Revered sir, the affair has cost me my wife. Kohlhaas would show the world that she fell in the performance of no injustice. Concede to my will on these points, and let the tribunal speak. In every other matter that may come under discussion, I yield.”
“Look,” said Luther, “what thou askest, supposing circumstances to be such as the general voice reports, is just; and if thou hadst endeavoured, without revenging thyself on thine own account, to lay thine affair before the elector for his decision, I have no doubt that thy request would have been granted, in every point. But all things considered, wouldst thou not have done better, if, for thy Redeemer’s sake, thou hadst forgiven the squire, taken the horses, lean and worn-out as they were, mounted them, and ridden home upon them to fatten them in their own stable at Kohlhaasenbrück.”
Now, to the book itself.
Young Luther's perfectionism
The first thing you learn about Luther that Harline outlines is his overscrupulousness:
And so when the friars sang Psalm 22 in choir, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Brother Martin really meant it. He suffered from what the professional religious called the “bath of hell,” or overscrupulousness, a sort of occupational hazard for people whose full-time job was to look inside and find sin. To Brother Martin, it was like fishing in a barrel, and so he exasperated his confessors more than most. They tried telling him that the big pile of sins he was always confessing were fake sins, and that next time he should come with some real sins that actually needed forgiving. Still, he found it hard to believe that any sin was small. After all, God was perfect, and the Bible commanded him to be perfect, and the constitution of the Observant Augustinians said that someday he would actually be able to obey every single requirement perfectly. Maybe he still just wasn’t trying hard enough.
He doesn't tie all the strings, but he uses this as an interpretive lens for all the doctrinal positions he develops later in life. The reason he rejects the role of works in salvation is due to his fear that he could never do enough. Funnily enough, Mormonism started with similar fears about personal salvation. Joseph Smith's account doesn't directly relate his concerns about the state of his soul prior to his First Vision (it does say that his "mind was called up to serious reflection and great uneasiness"), but the Church's video captures it really well when his little brother asks "What does saved mean?" and Joseph responds "I wish I knew myself!" After his First Vision though, he does become very concerned about his standing before God:
During the space of time which intervened... I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God. In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. A disposition to commit such was never in my nature. But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been. But this will not seem very strange to any one who recollects my youth, and is acquainted with my native cheery temperament.
In consequence of these things, I often felt condemned for my weakness and imperfections; when, on the evening of the above-mentioned twenty-first of September, after I had retired to my bed for the night, I betook myself to prayer and supplication to Almighty God for forgiveness of all my sins and follies, and also for a manifestation to me, that I might know of my state and standing before him; for I had full confidence in obtaining a divine manifestation, as I previously had one.
The similarity of the two is uncanny. Where Martin Luther turned to continued study in his castle tower, Joseph Smith turned to prayer. And where Martin Luther's seeking salvation led him to a doctrine centered on grace, Joseph Smith led him to a doctrine centered around covenants.
The matched ills of absolute authority and public sentiment
The other strand throughout the book that captured my attention is the very apparent dichotomy between the supremacy of the Pope and the increasing cacaphony of voices in the public square who disagree with him. I found this discussion very relevant to questions of personal freedom and authority in the form of the priesthood within Mormonism. You can just replace "Pope" with "Prophet" and "Martin Luther" with "Denver Snuffer" or "The September Five" or "Michael Quinn," and many of the verbal exchanges would sit well with either.
There were weaknesses on both sides of the dispute. I think anyone today would bristle a little when the Pope's defenders insist on the Pope's unconstrained authority. Tetzel, the famous seller of indulgences, challenged Luther when he argued that the Pope couldn't sell guaranteed forgiveness of sins without any actual change of heart or acts of penance. He shot back:
wholeheartedly defending the church’s current practices around indulgences and painstakingly refuting all of Luther’s claims: he was wrong about many things, they declared, but especially about limiting the authority of the pope, and in hinting that maybe there wasn’t really a purgatory, and in suggesting that a practice allowed by the pope wasn’t by definition good theology.
Mormons too insist that a practice is "by definition good theology" because it came from the Prophet. Why try to argue when you already know it comes from the Prophet who was called by God? Missionaries are counseled in Preach My Gospel to resolve thorny issues this way as taught by President Benson:
“… All objections, whether they be on abortion, plural marriage, seventh-day worship, etc., basically hinge on whether Joseph Smith and his successors were and are prophets of God receiving divine revelation. …
“… The only problem the objector has to resolve for himself is whether the Book of Mormon is true. For if the Book of Mormon is true, then Jesus is the Christ, Joseph Smith was his prophet, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, and it is being led today by a prophet receiving revelation.
“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand”
By insisting on the absolute rightness of authority, the Pope's defenders ultimately become extreme utilitarians: instead of considering whether peddling freedom from guilt is morally wrong, they are more concerned whether they will have enough money to build St. Peter's cathedral and pay off the archbishop's debts. Do we not also enter into morally shaky ground when we are more concerned with the number of baptisms we get or the number of lessons we teach rather than the spiritual welfare of those we are called to serve?
The other thing that struck me was the vicious response of the Pope's defenders. They weren't leaving any bridges unburned in their attempts to defend orthodoxy, ultimately inflaming the problem rather than calming it. Johann Eck had previously been a friend of Luther's, but he was almost cruel in the way he lashed out at Luther once he published his theses. Luther was hurt with that coming from a close friend. Eck responded: “Does Luther really believe that I could be his friend when he fights against the unity of the church?” I have seen similar tensions in disagreements within Mormonism, and I don't think it should have to be that way.
I'm not uncritical of Luther either. Where the Pope's defenders' weakness was an overzealous defense of absolute authority, Luther's was a growing feeling of acclaim that built as he published more and more scandalous material. I felt that his attitudes changed and became more hardened as he got more attention from the public. Harline writes:
But he was thoroughly stunned by another and totally unexpected response: the enthusiasm (and sometimes alarm) that came from hundreds of other people who had somehow managed to get their hands and eyes on a copy of the theses. How had it happened, when he’d sent out only a few?
He was surprised at first, but he came to like his celebrity status. The printing press was the 16th century's version of Facebook by the looks of it. Once his ideas caught on he begins sharpening them:
He decided in the Explanations not just to add his long proofs to the theses but to rewrite some of the theses themselves and make them even sharper than before, which couldn’t help but increase suspicions that he really did believe what the theses were saying, and also make him seem even more critical of indulgences, and the pope, than he was already suspected of being. Thesis 49 in the Explanations, for instance, no longer said that indulgences were useful under the right conditions but instead that they were downright dangerous and “directly contrary to the truth.” Thesis 50 no longer said that the pope would rather have St. Peter’s burn than that his flock be robbed, but instead that “indulgences are the most worthless of all possessions of the church” and “deserve to be cursed.” And 56 through 68 no longer just redefined the treasury of merits but denied that saints had any surplus merits to hand out at all.
This reminded me of a few now-famous Mormons as they came into the spotlight, names like Josh Weed and John Dehlin who keep blogs and podcasts. Both of these examples had tones that shifted from a more conservative view to an increasingly hostile and argumentative tone over time.
Another point: Luther moved the argument away from the more insulated arena of academia to the public square. This was at first unintentional: his disputations had been sent to a few bishops and professors for examination. But some monk thought they sounded so good, he couldn't help but "post them on his own wall" and eventually he got thousands of shares and retweets. This changed the ball game from an obscure disagreement among academics to an outright rebellion. "Once Brother Martin willingly printed that sermon and took the disputing outside the usual academic and churchly forum, he’d crossed the proverbial Rubicon and in his critics’ eyes lost his usual professorial right to dispute."
Luther further seemed to be unaware of the consequences of openly confronting the Pope. An innocent enough disagreement on the doctrine of indulgences seems fair enough, right? We as Mormons can agree to disagree with our leaders on some matters of doctrine. But this early on, Luther couldn't seem to foresee the likelihood of schism.
Not only that, but insisting that the Bible was above the pope, the way Luther constantly did, could get people thinking that everybody was free to interpret the Bible as they pleased, and that the interpretations of saintly doctors and even of the pope himself weren’t to be trusted! “All Christendom will come into spiritual danger when each individual believes what pleases him most,” Tetzel had already warned.
Finally, Luther also seemed to feel that if he just explained his views well enough, it would all clear up. After defying the Pope's authority to issue indulgences, he sent him a long 100+ page document going into extreme detail to back up his arguments. He thought, "Surely a work this thorough would clear up everything, and convince especially the Pope of his good intentions." Reason enough isn't everything, and it makes Luther seem a little naive, as are many well-intentioned political reformers in our own day.
The Church is big enough to contain multiple views
One writer who kept coming to mind as I read Luther's biography was G. K. Chesterton. Chesterton, a Catholic convert, wrote a few biographies himself, including one on St. Francis and another on St. Thomas, both of whom were known by Luther in his own day. Chesterton stressed the idea of catholicism within Catholicism: that the Church was big enough to contain multiple viewpoints, and that's what gives it endurance and flexibility to last through centuries:
St. Francis was so great and original a man that he had something in him of what makes the founder of a religion. Many of his followers were more or less ready, in their hearts, to treat him as the founder of a religion. They were willing to let the Franciscan spirit escape from Christendom as the Christian spirit had escaped from Israel. They were willing to let it eclipse Christendom as the Christian spirit had eclipsed Israel. Francis, the fire that ran through the roads of Italy, was to be the beginning of a conflagration in which the old Christian civilisation was to be consumed. That was the point the Pope had to settle; whether Christendom should absorb Francis or Francis Christendom. And he decided rightly, apart from the duties of his place; for the Church could include all that was good in the Franciscans and the Franciscans could not include all that was good in the Church.
Every heresy has been an effort to narrow the Church. If the Franciscan movement had turned into a new religion, it would after all have been a narrow religion. In so far as it did turn here and there into a heresy, it was a narrow heresy. It did what heresy always does; it set the mood against the mind.
Luther didn't seem to appreciate this idea, and didn't think that reform could come from within the Church, like his contemporary Erasmus. But all the fault can't perhaps be laid at his feet. Another thought on heresy comes from another favorite author, the Russian Orthodox Christian Nikolai Berdyaev. He remarked on how "heresy hunters" can also contribute to schism:
A fanatic of orthodoxy who denounces heresies and exterminates heretics has lost the vital fullness and harmony of truth, he is possessed by one emotion only and sees nothing but heresy and heretics everywhere. He becomes hard, forgets about the freedom of the spirit and has but little attention to bestow upon men and the complexity of individual destinies. Heaven preserve us from being obsessed by the idea of heresy! That obsession plays an enormous part in the history of Christianity and it is very difficult to get rid of it. A conviction has been bred for centuries that a religious fanatic, who mercilessly denounces heresies and heretics, is more religious than other men, and those who think that their own faith is weak respect him. In truth, however, a religious fanatic is a man who is obsessed by his idea and completely believes it, but is not in communion with the living God. On the contrary he is cut off from the living God. And for the sake of the fulness of divine truth, for the sake of freedom and love and communion with God, it is essential to uproot in oneself the evil will to denounce heresies and heretics. A heresy should be opposed by the fullness of truth and not by malice and denunciations. Fanatical denunciations of heresies sometimes assume the guise of love and are supposed to be inspired by love and pity for heretics. But this is hypocrisy and self-deception. Heresy hunters simply flatter themselves and admire their own orthodoxy...
Read the rest at https://historyengineers.wordpress.co...
January 30, 2018
This was a good read. I came into the book not knowing much about Luther and I left knowing a lot. The reading was a bit dry at times, but not so rough that I couldn’t muddle through.
November 23, 2017
Wittenberg, Worms, Wartburg – and Martin Luther
Craig Harline teaches history at Brigham Young University; If I had the opportunity, I'd register for every single one of his classes! If he speaks the way he writes...
There has been a deluge of Luther/Reformation-related books over the past year; even if you belong to the Flat Earth Society, you likely realize church and world very recently celebrated the 500 year anniversary of the event that kick-started the Protestant Reformation and put Wittenberg on the map. A World Ablaze – ablaze in the freedom and fire of the Spirit of Pentecost – chronicles some of magisterial reformer Martin Luther's academic history, his years as a professed religious friar and priest in the Roman Catholic Church, and the early years of the Wittenberg Reform, but not quite as concisely wrapped up as that brief description conveys.
During the months leading up to 31 October 2017, my church judicatory {oversight and accountability structure} sponsored a series of six Saturday-long Reformation Road Trip events. I attended five of them, and learned a lot about Luther's personality and assumptions, along with some of his rationale behind reforming worship and sacramental practices. Particularly as he details Luther's relationships with Frederick and Charles, Craig Harline fills in more of the blanks in my understanding.
I'd had some awareness of Brother / Doctor / Pastor Martin's political involvement, but I'd chalked it up to the fact if you stay in castles you need to stay friends with the people who own the castles. The idea of "The Presentation of The Augsburg Confession" to whom....? always seemed highly irregular to me in light of scripture, but Luther was more a late medieval guy than an early Renaissance one, so he depended upon and became involved with royals and government types in ways a late medieval worldview implies, and thus developed his doctrine of separate Spiritual and Temporal Kingdoms. It's far more nuanced than that, yet the concept isn't biblical. Would I want a theocracy like John Calvin's Geneva or colonial New England's? Not that, either. Not. Scriptural. In his Small Catechism explanation to the Lord's Prayer, Pastor Martin himself lists "good government" as part of the daily bread we need and pray for. In any case, my confidence in the {almost realized but not quite yet} eschatology of the Reign {Kingdom} of Heaven on earth is far more robustly Reformed than it is Lutheran.
{page 273} "He turned a very old 60 in 1543, and even began to dislike Wittenberg." Our Reformation Roadtrip presenter also mentioned Luther's very "premature aging"—despite 60 way back then being much older than even 70 years old is now in 2017. He told us Luther didn't travel much, probably a factor in his attitude being more insular than most educated people of his time. Lack of exposure to different styles of being and living may have contributed to his ultra-embarrassing diatribes again Jews and Judaism. Enough to get him banned from today's twitter? Probably. The late Timothy Lull referred to Luther's "polemical overkill."
Beyond the history that's never bare, I've taken away more than what's on the surface of A World Ablaze. I believe Martin Luther was Holy Ghosted Roasted, as were countless others who reformed / revitalized / restored the church. Like Luther, every one of the Spirit-filled and Spirit-led renewers of the church had a share of human frailties and less than admirable traits. Jan Hus, John Wycliffe, Ulrich Zwingli, Bros Charles and John along with Mom Susanna Wesley. In the New World? Awakenings through the agency of George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards; Restoration movements from Barton Stone, Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Joseph Smith. Back across the Atlantic, renewal or aggiornamento in the Roman branch of the church via John XXIII—even protestants commemorate and celebrate him as a Renewer of the Church; his liturgical reforms still continue to ripple through mainline protestantism! I'm taking away and claiming the validity of doctrinally and liturgically diverse expressions of the church, partly acknowledging Luther and cohorts' insisting we find the church and "it is enough" {satis est in the Latin version of Article VII of the Augsburg Confession} for the unity of the church that the gospel be preached and the sacraments rightly administered. Everything else is indifferent or adiaphora, a term famously ascribed to Lutherans but also used elsewhere.
A World Ablaze opens and concludes with Brother Martin in his Knight George persona making a quick incognito visit to Wittenberg from Wartburg Castle—nice way to capture reader interest. The back includes a useful collection of Sources and Further Reading. I plan to keep this book in my permanent collection and expect to read it again, though I may loan it to my church library before I do.
Craig Harline teaches history at Brigham Young University; If I had the opportunity, I'd register for every single one of his classes! If he speaks the way he writes...
There has been a deluge of Luther/Reformation-related books over the past year; even if you belong to the Flat Earth Society, you likely realize church and world very recently celebrated the 500 year anniversary of the event that kick-started the Protestant Reformation and put Wittenberg on the map. A World Ablaze – ablaze in the freedom and fire of the Spirit of Pentecost – chronicles some of magisterial reformer Martin Luther's academic history, his years as a professed religious friar and priest in the Roman Catholic Church, and the early years of the Wittenberg Reform, but not quite as concisely wrapped up as that brief description conveys.
During the months leading up to 31 October 2017, my church judicatory {oversight and accountability structure} sponsored a series of six Saturday-long Reformation Road Trip events. I attended five of them, and learned a lot about Luther's personality and assumptions, along with some of his rationale behind reforming worship and sacramental practices. Particularly as he details Luther's relationships with Frederick and Charles, Craig Harline fills in more of the blanks in my understanding.
I'd had some awareness of Brother / Doctor / Pastor Martin's political involvement, but I'd chalked it up to the fact if you stay in castles you need to stay friends with the people who own the castles. The idea of "The Presentation of The Augsburg Confession" to whom....? always seemed highly irregular to me in light of scripture, but Luther was more a late medieval guy than an early Renaissance one, so he depended upon and became involved with royals and government types in ways a late medieval worldview implies, and thus developed his doctrine of separate Spiritual and Temporal Kingdoms. It's far more nuanced than that, yet the concept isn't biblical. Would I want a theocracy like John Calvin's Geneva or colonial New England's? Not that, either. Not. Scriptural. In his Small Catechism explanation to the Lord's Prayer, Pastor Martin himself lists "good government" as part of the daily bread we need and pray for. In any case, my confidence in the {almost realized but not quite yet} eschatology of the Reign {Kingdom} of Heaven on earth is far more robustly Reformed than it is Lutheran.
{page 273} "He turned a very old 60 in 1543, and even began to dislike Wittenberg." Our Reformation Roadtrip presenter also mentioned Luther's very "premature aging"—despite 60 way back then being much older than even 70 years old is now in 2017. He told us Luther didn't travel much, probably a factor in his attitude being more insular than most educated people of his time. Lack of exposure to different styles of being and living may have contributed to his ultra-embarrassing diatribes again Jews and Judaism. Enough to get him banned from today's twitter? Probably. The late Timothy Lull referred to Luther's "polemical overkill."
Beyond the history that's never bare, I've taken away more than what's on the surface of A World Ablaze. I believe Martin Luther was Holy Ghosted Roasted, as were countless others who reformed / revitalized / restored the church. Like Luther, every one of the Spirit-filled and Spirit-led renewers of the church had a share of human frailties and less than admirable traits. Jan Hus, John Wycliffe, Ulrich Zwingli, Bros Charles and John along with Mom Susanna Wesley. In the New World? Awakenings through the agency of George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards; Restoration movements from Barton Stone, Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Joseph Smith. Back across the Atlantic, renewal or aggiornamento in the Roman branch of the church via John XXIII—even protestants commemorate and celebrate him as a Renewer of the Church; his liturgical reforms still continue to ripple through mainline protestantism! I'm taking away and claiming the validity of doctrinally and liturgically diverse expressions of the church, partly acknowledging Luther and cohorts' insisting we find the church and "it is enough" {satis est in the Latin version of Article VII of the Augsburg Confession} for the unity of the church that the gospel be preached and the sacraments rightly administered. Everything else is indifferent or adiaphora, a term famously ascribed to Lutherans but also used elsewhere.
A World Ablaze opens and concludes with Brother Martin in his Knight George persona making a quick incognito visit to Wittenberg from Wartburg Castle—nice way to capture reader interest. The back includes a useful collection of Sources and Further Reading. I plan to keep this book in my permanent collection and expect to read it again, though I may loan it to my church library before I do.
April 21, 2025
Craig Harline’s A World Ablaze: The Rise of Martin Luther and the Birth of the Reformation offers one of the most accessible and emotionally resonant portrayals of Martin Luther I’ve encountered. Published in 2017 to mark the 500th anniversary of Luther’s 95 Theses, Harline’s book is not a comprehensive biography or a dense theological study. Instead, it is a narrative-driven, culturally aware, and psychologically sensitive portrait of a man whose internal crisis of faith happened to intersect with a moment in history ready to ignite.
What Harline does especially well, and what makes this book stand out, is bring to life the emotional and intellectual world of the early sixteenth century. This is not just about Luther the Reformer. It is about the anxieties, rituals, and beliefs that shaped the lives of ordinary people and the clerical elite. It is about what it felt like to be a devout Christian at a time when the fear of damnation was real, when indulgences offered tangible relief, and when questioning the Church’s authority seemed both spiritually dangerous and socially destabilizing.
Harline traces Luther’s transformation from a deeply troubled monk, plagued by fears of his own unworthiness, to a defiant critic of Church corruption and eventually to a religious icon whose writings, thanks to the printing press, sparked a movement far larger than he ever imagined. One of the book’s strengths is how it avoids turning Luther into a simplistic hero. He is presented as stubborn, anxious, brilliant, and sometimes overwhelmed by the forces he unleashed. Harline allows the reader to see a man who was profoundly shaped by the very system he would eventually confront.
The writing is clear, thoughtful, and often beautiful. Harline avoids academic jargon without oversimplifying. He patiently builds historical context, explaining what indulgences were, why they mattered, how the Catholic Church functioned, and why Luther’s protest resonated so widely. His strongest storytelling moments come when he focuses on the people surrounding Luther, showing how friends, opponents, and laypeople all responded to the theological and political aftershocks.
This is not a comprehensive history of the Protestant Reformation. Some readers might wish it continued beyond the Diet of Worms or delved more deeply into the theological legacy of Lutheranism. But that is not the book’s goal. Harline is interested in the spark, not the full blaze. He wants us to understand how a particular moment, a particular man, and a particular set of circumstances aligned to shift the course of Western Christianity.
From an academic perspective, this is an ideal supplemental text. It would work well in undergraduate courses on Reformation history, Christian thought, or early modern Europe. It is also a strong choice for general readers looking to understand Luther and his world without committing to a thousand-page tome.
Recommended for: • Readers new to the Reformation who want a story-driven introduction • Students and teachers seeking a well-written, focused text on Martin Luther • Fans of narrative nonfiction who enjoy books that blend historical insight with character-driven storytelling • Anyone curious about how one man’s spiritual struggle helped shape the modern world
Readers who want a broader or more theological survey may prefer works by Heiko Oberman or Diarmaid MacCulloch. But for those who want to begin with the human drama at the heart of the Reformation, A World Ablaze is an excellent choice.
For more check out my video review:
https://youtu.be/jQVAhx9jCdU
For more reviews check out my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/@SpencerReadsE...
What Harline does especially well, and what makes this book stand out, is bring to life the emotional and intellectual world of the early sixteenth century. This is not just about Luther the Reformer. It is about the anxieties, rituals, and beliefs that shaped the lives of ordinary people and the clerical elite. It is about what it felt like to be a devout Christian at a time when the fear of damnation was real, when indulgences offered tangible relief, and when questioning the Church’s authority seemed both spiritually dangerous and socially destabilizing.
Harline traces Luther’s transformation from a deeply troubled monk, plagued by fears of his own unworthiness, to a defiant critic of Church corruption and eventually to a religious icon whose writings, thanks to the printing press, sparked a movement far larger than he ever imagined. One of the book’s strengths is how it avoids turning Luther into a simplistic hero. He is presented as stubborn, anxious, brilliant, and sometimes overwhelmed by the forces he unleashed. Harline allows the reader to see a man who was profoundly shaped by the very system he would eventually confront.
The writing is clear, thoughtful, and often beautiful. Harline avoids academic jargon without oversimplifying. He patiently builds historical context, explaining what indulgences were, why they mattered, how the Catholic Church functioned, and why Luther’s protest resonated so widely. His strongest storytelling moments come when he focuses on the people surrounding Luther, showing how friends, opponents, and laypeople all responded to the theological and political aftershocks.
This is not a comprehensive history of the Protestant Reformation. Some readers might wish it continued beyond the Diet of Worms or delved more deeply into the theological legacy of Lutheranism. But that is not the book’s goal. Harline is interested in the spark, not the full blaze. He wants us to understand how a particular moment, a particular man, and a particular set of circumstances aligned to shift the course of Western Christianity.
From an academic perspective, this is an ideal supplemental text. It would work well in undergraduate courses on Reformation history, Christian thought, or early modern Europe. It is also a strong choice for general readers looking to understand Luther and his world without committing to a thousand-page tome.
Recommended for: • Readers new to the Reformation who want a story-driven introduction • Students and teachers seeking a well-written, focused text on Martin Luther • Fans of narrative nonfiction who enjoy books that blend historical insight with character-driven storytelling • Anyone curious about how one man’s spiritual struggle helped shape the modern world
Readers who want a broader or more theological survey may prefer works by Heiko Oberman or Diarmaid MacCulloch. But for those who want to begin with the human drama at the heart of the Reformation, A World Ablaze is an excellent choice.
For more check out my video review:
https://youtu.be/jQVAhx9jCdU
For more reviews check out my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/@SpencerReadsE...
November 29, 2018
Craig Harline's book on Martin Luther focuses on the pivotal years of Martin's life, 1517-1522, from when he posted his famous 95 theses on the doors of the church in Wittenberg, to his return to his home city after the Diet of Worms, his excommunication, and his year in hiding. Harline does a good job of showing the evolution of the reformation father's thinking, mostly based on the core doctrine of justification by faith. This was Martin's initial problem with indulgences: if works matter not, then how can the purchase of an indulgence (which initially was only supposed to reduce time in purgatory) guarantee salvation and the forgiveness of sin? Yet as his thinking expanded, and he slowly freed his mind from dependance on papal interpretation of scripture, he cast off so many of the basic beliefs of the Catholic Church. He declared there were 3 sacraments rather than 7, taught that anyone could take both the wafer and the wine (in his time only priests took the wine), denied that the pope's supreme authority came from the time of Christ, and basically threw the entire canon open for personal interpretation.
Yet he was not radical enough for many of his contemporaries. Indeed, when Martin Luther returned to Wittenberg after his year in hiding he brought back the traditional Latin Mass and insisted things should move slowly, out of respect for those who had difficulty letting go of religious traditions. He chafed against the use of his name in the reforms of the next 20 years, often disagreeing with the direction his followers took.
It was interesting to learn how much the political situation of the day allowed for Luther's "revolution." Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, was opposed to Germany's break from Rome, but with so many territories to rule over, was only rarely present to enforce his will, and even then lacked authority to constrain the various princes and electors in the German provinces. This finally resulted in the Peace of Augsburg, wherein each German prince was given the official right to determine the religion in his territory.
I learned a lot, so why am I only giving this book 3.5 stars? Honestly, I didn't enjoy Professor Harline's tone. The entire book was written in a sort of tongue-in-cheek style, as if he was trying to entertain the reader with his sarcasm. He often made light of very serious things, which I suppose makes the text move quickly, but didn't fit the topic for me. He seemed to take great pleasure in discussing Pope Leo X's fistula and Martin Luther's constipation. I don't believe in hagiographic history, wherein the figures are treated like faultless saints, but somehow this went a little too far for me in the other direction.
Yet he was not radical enough for many of his contemporaries. Indeed, when Martin Luther returned to Wittenberg after his year in hiding he brought back the traditional Latin Mass and insisted things should move slowly, out of respect for those who had difficulty letting go of religious traditions. He chafed against the use of his name in the reforms of the next 20 years, often disagreeing with the direction his followers took.
It was interesting to learn how much the political situation of the day allowed for Luther's "revolution." Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, was opposed to Germany's break from Rome, but with so many territories to rule over, was only rarely present to enforce his will, and even then lacked authority to constrain the various princes and electors in the German provinces. This finally resulted in the Peace of Augsburg, wherein each German prince was given the official right to determine the religion in his territory.
I learned a lot, so why am I only giving this book 3.5 stars? Honestly, I didn't enjoy Professor Harline's tone. The entire book was written in a sort of tongue-in-cheek style, as if he was trying to entertain the reader with his sarcasm. He often made light of very serious things, which I suppose makes the text move quickly, but didn't fit the topic for me. He seemed to take great pleasure in discussing Pope Leo X's fistula and Martin Luther's constipation. I don't believe in hagiographic history, wherein the figures are treated like faultless saints, but somehow this went a little too far for me in the other direction.
August 8, 2018
Let's begin with what I didn't like, because this list is very small:
1) Stylistically speaking, Mr. Harline enjoys starting his chapters in reversal. What I mean by that is this: Let's say Martin Luther is riding in a cart to Leipzig to dispute his latest book with another theologian. The chapter would often start with a carriage ride, an unnamed rider, and some sort of looming argument on the horizon. It might take even two or three pages to find out the necessary details, backwards (first that they're going to Leipzig, then that it's a disputation, then about a book, then finally who the disputing parties are). I did eventually get used to it, but for the first several chapters I felt very lost and frustrated when he withheld details for so long.
2) ...I can't think of anything else significant enough to put in this list!
What I did like:
1) This book is suitable for someone completely ignorant about the Protestant Reformation (like me). And I'm thrilled to say that I am now the furthest thing from ignorant about the Protestant Reformation! :)
2) The author provides enough detail to help you get a living image of the people and events without sacrificing truth. He isn't afraid to include all the juicy bits of information that might be one or two sources short of entirely credible; he simply lets you know that last 'fact' was in dispute. Five hundred year-old rumors are still enlightening, so I'm glad that Mr. Harline shared them with me.
3) The author takes the time to share information about other key figures in this story besides the obvious ones (i.e. Luther and Pope Leo). Again, this helped bring this time in history alive for me, because it helped me see how such a complex web of personalities and backgrounds were drawn into the birth of a religious reformation.
Overall, this was a much denser read than I am used to. (I'm still dipping my toes into the historical waters.) Yet, it was so well written and interesting that I pushed through and do not regret it one bit! I would definitely recommend this book to history buffs and 'newbies' alike!
1) Stylistically speaking, Mr. Harline enjoys starting his chapters in reversal. What I mean by that is this: Let's say Martin Luther is riding in a cart to Leipzig to dispute his latest book with another theologian. The chapter would often start with a carriage ride, an unnamed rider, and some sort of looming argument on the horizon. It might take even two or three pages to find out the necessary details, backwards (first that they're going to Leipzig, then that it's a disputation, then about a book, then finally who the disputing parties are). I did eventually get used to it, but for the first several chapters I felt very lost and frustrated when he withheld details for so long.
2) ...I can't think of anything else significant enough to put in this list!
What I did like:
1) This book is suitable for someone completely ignorant about the Protestant Reformation (like me). And I'm thrilled to say that I am now the furthest thing from ignorant about the Protestant Reformation! :)
2) The author provides enough detail to help you get a living image of the people and events without sacrificing truth. He isn't afraid to include all the juicy bits of information that might be one or two sources short of entirely credible; he simply lets you know that last 'fact' was in dispute. Five hundred year-old rumors are still enlightening, so I'm glad that Mr. Harline shared them with me.
3) The author takes the time to share information about other key figures in this story besides the obvious ones (i.e. Luther and Pope Leo). Again, this helped bring this time in history alive for me, because it helped me see how such a complex web of personalities and backgrounds were drawn into the birth of a religious reformation.
Overall, this was a much denser read than I am used to. (I'm still dipping my toes into the historical waters.) Yet, it was so well written and interesting that I pushed through and do not regret it one bit! I would definitely recommend this book to history buffs and 'newbies' alike!
January 7, 2025
I think I would give this 3.5 stars if I could. This describes Luther's religious live, mainly in Wittenberg, and how his thoughts on various Catholic traditions changed mainly due to some doubts in his own mind about his salvation and whether he could ever be good enough to enter heaven. There is a lot of description of Luther's fights with the pope and other antagonists who were horrified by Luther's brazen teachings.
A central focus of the book is on the Catholic church's reliance on indulgences and how Luther greatly opposed them. The author explains how indulgences became such a critical money-raising activity for the church and how the pope, cardinals and bishops got creative to come up with new indulgences and tried to shake down ordinary church-goers to buy them. The book explains the connection between buying indulgences and avoiding or shortening stays in purgatory.
It was a generally good book to read but there were a few things that were somewhat irritating. For one, the constant use of the conjunction 'and' instead a comma. There was also a curious use of a diacritic on the 'e' when the past tense of a verb was used. There was also a perhaps attempt to be casual or something and begin an explanatory sentence with 'Oh'.
A central focus of the book is on the Catholic church's reliance on indulgences and how Luther greatly opposed them. The author explains how indulgences became such a critical money-raising activity for the church and how the pope, cardinals and bishops got creative to come up with new indulgences and tried to shake down ordinary church-goers to buy them. The book explains the connection between buying indulgences and avoiding or shortening stays in purgatory.
It was a generally good book to read but there were a few things that were somewhat irritating. For one, the constant use of the conjunction 'and' instead a comma. There was also a curious use of a diacritic on the 'e' when the past tense of a verb was used. There was also a perhaps attempt to be casual or something and begin an explanatory sentence with 'Oh'.
September 21, 2017
This is an incredibly detailed and sometimes too detailed account of the rise of Martin Luther. There were times I thought that I did not need to know who was there, the roads taken or the clothing worn. However, that aside, this is a very readable history of one of the great peaceful revolutions of western history. I was not aware that Luther wrote so much. So much, in fact, that a historian like Mr. Harline could write in such detail about the events, characters and theology.
Mr. Harline's writing had a certain light touch. This allowed the theological to be as readable and comprehensible as the historical account. One learns that there was far more to Luther's "heresy: than just the 95 theses tacked on a church door. He was the root of "Lutheranism" and the "Protestant" religions. He was also very human although a part of him may have wanted to have his blood shed as a saintly martyr. Equally captivating as his life is the incredible corruption of the ruling class in and out of the church during the "Dark Ages".
This is a fine history recommended for anyone with an interest in church history and the Middle Ages.
Mr. Harline's writing had a certain light touch. This allowed the theological to be as readable and comprehensible as the historical account. One learns that there was far more to Luther's "heresy: than just the 95 theses tacked on a church door. He was the root of "Lutheranism" and the "Protestant" religions. He was also very human although a part of him may have wanted to have his blood shed as a saintly martyr. Equally captivating as his life is the incredible corruption of the ruling class in and out of the church during the "Dark Ages".
This is a fine history recommended for anyone with an interest in church history and the Middle Ages.
September 29, 2017
"A World Ablaze" focused on Martin Luther's life between Oct. 31, 1517 (when his 95 theses were posted on the church door in Wittenberg) to the Diet of Worms, his "exile" at Wartburg, and his return to Wittenberg in the spring of 1522. There was also a chapter summarizing Luther's life before this time and a chapter summarizing what happened afterward (until his death).
The author summarized the gist of what Luther wrote and believed during this period, but the focus was equally on the political situation surrounding Luther. We got details about the various meetings that Luther went to and short biographies about the major players, like Frederick the Wise and the Pope. The book wasn't really about the theological issues (why Luther believed what he believed) but rather the impact those ideas had. The author wrote for the average person, and he tried to inject humor into the subject. Unfortunately, that humor usually had me rolling my eyes rather than laughing, but it may appeal to other people. Overall, I enjoyed this book.
I received an ARC review copy of this book from the publisher through Amazon Vine.
The author summarized the gist of what Luther wrote and believed during this period, but the focus was equally on the political situation surrounding Luther. We got details about the various meetings that Luther went to and short biographies about the major players, like Frederick the Wise and the Pope. The book wasn't really about the theological issues (why Luther believed what he believed) but rather the impact those ideas had. The author wrote for the average person, and he tried to inject humor into the subject. Unfortunately, that humor usually had me rolling my eyes rather than laughing, but it may appeal to other people. Overall, I enjoyed this book.
I received an ARC review copy of this book from the publisher through Amazon Vine.
June 9, 2018
This book took me back in time to gross food habits, almost no hygiene nor health care, difficult travel, and other discomforts of life. It was hard to read many descriptions no matter how realistic. The difficulties contrast with the prolific speaking and writing of Martin Luther during the years 1517-1522 when his reformation became popular. I recommend it to teens and above who want to know more about life at that time and how intertwined the Roman church and governments were, to the exploitation of many.
October 22, 2025
A World Ablaze is a fantastic and engaging summary of the origins of Martin Luther and the early years of the Reformation. Harline manages to make a complex historical and theological moment both vivid and accessible, writing in a style that’s easily understandable for a general audience without sacrificing depth. His storytelling approach brings Luther’s personality and the world around him to life, showing not only what Luther did but why it mattered.
This book is an excellent introduction for anyone curious about how one monk’s inner struggle sparked a movement that changed history.
This book is an excellent introduction for anyone curious about how one monk’s inner struggle sparked a movement that changed history.
January 15, 2018
I got this book through a Goodreads Giveaway in exchange for an honest review. It was an (trhe year he put up his excellent history of Martin Luther from . I felt that I had a much better understanding of the world of Germany and the politics involved in Luther surviving from the time he published his 95 Theses through his trials with the Pope and Holy Roman Empire. Very e and fascinating. Highly recommended.
June 29, 2020
Harline vertelt een goed en volledig verhaal, dat over de “eerste jaren” van Maarten Luther, a rebel with a cause. Veel geschiedenisboeken haspelen dikwijls het verhaal over de beginjaren van de Reformatie in een sneltempo af. Wereld in wanorde geeft een grondig en vooral menselijk gelaat aan de man die aan het begin van de zestiende eeuw de katholieke kerk op haar grondvesten deed daveren en het geloof opnieuw centraal stelde. Klasseboek.
November 13, 2017
Thank you Goodreads for sending me this book. I enjoyed this book. It was an interesting read, well written and you get a feel of Luther and those around him as real characters rather than just as people from history. I found the discussion between Luther and the Pope’s representatives vivid and concise. There are also some wonderful illustrations throughout the book.
June 9, 2018
I remember as a young man learning about Martin Luther and passing over it. There is so much with the life of Martin Luther. The author did a wonderful job portraying Luther in all his dealings with his break from the Catholic Church. Many stories from the book gave better insight to the life and time of Martin Luther.
July 13, 2019
I won this book in a giveaway. I started reading this book not knowing much about the Reformation and came away with a much better understanding of the events that caused the church to split. This book also answered one of my lifelong questions-- why did my Irish Catholic and Roman Catholic grandparents only get the host at communion, but my Episcopalian friends also got the wine? Now I know.
August 16, 2019
Harline is such a good storyteller! This is one of the funniest Luther biographies I’ve read. But this left me more informed than inspired. (Harline’s obviously talented and knows his stuff. But he comes from a Mormon perspective, so it makes sense that I’d resonate more with biographies written by Protestant theologians.)
October 6, 2020
The story of Martin Luther's life during the pivotal years between 1518 and 1522. Very detailed account, probably too detailed, as I had a hard time getting through it but that is probably more a reflection of me than anything. It brought to my knowledge the hardness of things like travel and discomforts of life back in the 14th century. I am grateful for this Reformer and his courage.
December 27, 2017
Interesting introduction to Luther for those who know little or nothing about him. Gives a good idea of how his ideas fitted with what else was happening at the time. The slightly chatty style of writing did make me feel that the author really wants to be writing fiction.
February 11, 2018
A fabulously accessible book on Martin Luther and the beginnings of the Reformation. I appreciated not only the very readable style of the book, but the context provided and inclusions of sources for further study. I would highly recommend.
March 19, 2019
Not at all the book I thought I was going to read, but that's not intended to be negative. I had never understood the extent to which the Reformation depended on the national ambitions and political positioning of the key German nobles involved. Parallels with Brexit abound.
April 13, 2025
Really compelling read that dove into the nerdy theological stuff that Luther&co were arguing about. I hadn’t been exposed to the meat of it before. The fact that it’s so compelling makes me want to do additional research to see if the tale has been yassified in favor of Luther.
February 17, 2018
Well written in an interesting narrative for the average layperson. I learned a lot, and I'm glad I read it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews