The starting-point not simply the desire to reform the Church; nor mere antipathy to the Dominicans. Hus’s influence merely secondary. Luther’s own account of his search for a “merciful God” not to be trusted any more than his later descriptions of his life as a monk _pages_ 104-110 2. WHETHER EVIL CONCUPISCENCE IS IRRESISTIBLE? Luther’s belief in its irresistibility not to be alleged as a proof of his moral perversity. Traces of the belief early noticeable in him; he demands that people should nevertheless strive against concupiscence with the weapons of the spirit; concupiscence ineradicable, identical with original sin, and actually sinful. Luther not a determinist from the beginning. His pseudo-mysticism scarcely reconcilable with his supposed moral perversity _pages_ 110-117 3. THE REAL STARTING-POINT AND THE CO-OPERATING FACTORS. Luther’s new opinions grounded on his antipathy to good works; hence his belief in the incapacity of man for good. Other factors; his character, his self-confidence and combativeness; his anger with the formalism prevalent in his day; his fear of eternal reprobation; his inadequate knowledge of the real doctrine of the Church; his hasty promotion _pages_ 117-129 CHAPTER IV. “I AM OF OCCAM’S PARTY” _pages_ 130-165 1. A CLOSER EXAMINATION OF LUTHER’S THEOLOGICAL TRAINING. Not trained in the best school of Scholasticism. His Occamist education. Positive and negative influence of Occamism on Luther _pages_ 130-133 2. NEGATIVE INFLUENCE OF THE OCCAMIST SCHOOL ON LUTHER. Luther’s criticism of Occam; he abandons certain views of the Occamists and flies to the opposite extreme; offended by their neglect of Scripture and by the subtlety of their philosophy; hence he comes to oppose Aristotelianism and the Scholastics generally. Occamistic exaggeration of man’s powers leads him _ex opposito_ to underrate the same. Negative influence of Occamism on Luther’s teaching regarding original sin. Gabriel Biel on original sin; the keeping of the commandments; the love of God; whether man can merit grace; Gregory of Rimini; the principle: “_Facienti quod est in se Deus non denegat gratiam_”; the deficiencies of the Occamists laid at the door of Scholasticism. Three answers to the question how Luther failed to perceive that he was forsaking the Church’s doctrine. His denial of natural righteousness, and his ignorance of the true scholastic teaching on the point; misunderstands his own masters. His interpretation of the words, “Without me ye can do nothing.” His rejection of actual grace _pages_ 133-154 3. POSITIVE INFLUENCE OF OCCAMISM.