Cancel

Tabletalk Subscription
You have {{ remainingArticles }} free {{ counterWords }} remaining.You've accessed all your free articles.
Unlock the Archives for Free

Request your free, three-month trial to Tabletalk magazine. You’ll receive the print issue monthly and gain immediate digital access to decades of archives. This trial is risk-free. No credit card required.

Try Tabletalk Now

Already receive Tabletalk magazine every month?

Verify your email address to gain unlimited access.

{{ error }}Need help?

Romans 1:16–17

“I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, ‘The righteous shall live by faith.’ ”

Undoubtedly, the scholarly study of subjects such as history and psychology do much good when people approach them with humility and with an effort to find the truth and not merely to confirm already existing biases. All too often, however, this is not the case. Paul warns us that knowledge regularly “puffs up” (1 Cor. 8:1), that we easily fall into the trap of becoming haughty when we increase in our understanding.

In disciplines such as history and psychology, this arrogance often manifests itself in the conclusions drawn about people from the past. Too quickly, scholars think that they can accurately diagnose the great men and women of history with all manner of psychoses based solely on the writings of figures who passed from this life long ago and not on the kind of personal interviews that such diagnoses require if they are to be accurate. Among the men of history subject to such treatment, Martin Luther stands out, with some even calling the great Reformer insane because of his larger-than-life personality and obsession with sin and holiness.

Certainly it is evident that Luther suffered from bouts of anxiety, and he could even be a bit of a hypochondriac. Yet the real driver of conclusions regarding Luther’s “insanity” is his acute sense of personal guilt. Before his conversion, Luther was frequently convinced that God was about to strike him down for his sin. After he was ordained as a priest, he froze during the first Mass he officiated when he went to consecrate the bread and the wine because he realized his unworthiness before God. Furthermore, most of us are likely familiar with how Luther would wear out other priests by spending hours confessing to them even his most trivial sins.

What some have called Luther’s insanity because of his focus on his sin and guilt is better labeled as profound insight into the Lord’s holiness and justice. It was because Luther knew the holiness of God so well that he feared divine wrath so greatly. Modern culture encourages us to deny our guilt and find any excuse for our selfishness besides our fallenness. Luther, however, did not fall into such traps. His reasoning about sin and what he deserved was sound, for a perfectly holy Creator must punish sin. But Luther did not spend his whole life racked with guilt. In time, through his study of Scripture, he found an answer for his guilt in the righteousness of Christ imputed to believers through faith in Jesus alone (Rom. 1:16–17).

Coram Deo Living before the face of God

Martin Luther had a high view of God’s holiness and understood the depths of human depravity. The reason that so many wonder about his state of mind is that our views of divine holiness and human depravity are not sufficiently biblical. Let us not make that mistake but strive always to know and affirm what Scripture says about these topics.


For Further Study
  • Genesis 15:6
  • Psalm 130
  • Galatians 3:10–14
  • 1 Peter 1:13–21

    God’s Holy Patience and Wrath

    Christ’s Perfect Holiness

    Keep Reading Anger

    From the June 2022 Issue
    Jun 2022 Issue