Then why did you use that tainted source?
Not being able to get at Luther in more direct fashion, it seems as of there has been something of a cottage industry among RCC apologists turning to psychoanalysis of seemingly everyone ---except themselves.
In the end that results in betrayal of their own "scruples" and/or can be evidence of some serious lack thereof.
Which leads back to my earlier point, that it seems to me Protestants are compelled to defend Luther because if he is discredited for being evil or mentally ill, it questions the legitimacy of the movement, and threatens the doctrinal assumptions of millions. The same would be true, albeit more severe, were the Apostle Paul discredited.
Can you prove I did? I sited the source by which I proved Luther's debilitating condition. O'Hare wasn't part of the equation. However we shouldn't let that get in the way of setting up a protestant straw man based on assumptions.
Not being able to get at Luther in more direct fashion, it seems as of there has been something of a cottageindustry among RCC apologists turning to psychoanalysis of seemingly everyone ---except themselves.
And yet nobody can say that they are wrong.
But don't worry we have plenty of pseudo-intellectual protestants around here playing esoteric archeologists, Expressing their inner Dan Brown so it all balances out.