I’m a Catholic. Obviously, I think Luther was wrong. Relevant Radio had a discussion with somebody regarding this book recently (TAN Books, Msgr. Patrick O’Hare).
So I asked and got it for Christmas. It was written in 1916 and DEFINATELY is not done in a tone of ecumenism. The author doesn’t mince words or spare the feelings of anybody with a soft spot for him.
But he does seem to do a pretty good job of citing his sources, and uses primary sources for the most part (I’m only about 15% through it so far).
So far, I’m SHOCKED. I’d always assumed Luther was a well intentioned guy with genuinely sincere faith who went off the rails as an over-reaction to actual corruption and abuses he observed in the church of his day. But so far, I see a proud, two-faced, obstinate sufferer of scrupulosity who refused to take his superiors advice for dealing with his problem (scrupulosity) and instead abused and berated anyone who tried to explain things to him. He appears to have given credence to any ecclesial horror story told to him and calculatedly used the greed and power-lust of the local ‘nobility’ to avoid suffering consequences from the church. This is nothing like I expected to learn!
Obviously, any protestant folks here are going to say this author must be a partisan catholic hack (since Luther is revered as much as a protestant can revere and dead human), but I’m curious to hear the opinions of any catholics who have read this book or have some scholarly knowledge of the period.
P.S. TAN threw in another book on the origins of the reformation by Hillaire Belloc, but I haven’t touched it yet.