WHY LUTHER COULD NOT BE SAVED
AS A ROMAN CATHOLIC
(And Why His Parents Could Be)

In all my reading of Alexander Campbell I have found nothing that states his understanding of the meaning of religion as well as a dialogue that he invented between Martin Luther and a monk named Erastian. The dialogue deals with the nature of piety, which is the essence of religion, according to Mr. Campbell. The dialogue helps us to understand something very important in the thinking of our pioneers: the principle of available light, or the view that one is to be judged by the opportunities he has had.

In the dialogue Campbell has the monk asking Luther, “Friend Luther, What think you has become of your father?” Luther replies that he is sure that his father has gone to heaven. “And your mother too?,” asked the monk. Luther expresses confidence that not only his parents but his grandparents as well are all in heaven “for Saxony cannot boast of more devout Catholics than they.”

At this Erastian presses his point: “In the name of both St. Peter and St. Paul, why have you raised all this fuss in Germany and throughout the world? Do you expect anything better than to go to heaven when you die?”

Luther concedes that nothing is better than heaven and that he expects no more. The monk now wants to know that if his parents could be saved in the Roman church why couldn’t he. “How dare you separate from the church in which your parents were saved?,” he asked Luther.

Luther answers: “Because my parents were pious members of that church, which I could not possibly be.” Erastian wants to know why not. The reformer answers: Because I have been favored with more knowledge than they.

Campbell goes on to use this device to show that “more knowledge” condemns, more knowledge than one conforms to, for one is responsible according to his knowledge and ability. And so Campbell has Luther say of his parents: “They lived in conformity to all they knew, and died in the church; I live in conformity to what I know, and have left the church.”

This gives Campbell an opportunity to deal with the nature of piety. It was piety that kept Luther’s parents loyal to the Roman church, and it was piety that caused Luther to leave that church. In other contexts Campbell equates piety to sincerity and makes the pious, sincere heart the basis of one’s acceptance before God. He is quick to explain that he does not mean anything like “It doesn’t matter what you believe so long as you are sincere.” To Campbell piety and sincerity imply that one is never wilfully ignorant but he humbly seeks to know and to obey God’s will.

Campbell has Luther make an incisive observation in this mock dialogue: the ratio of piety is the ratio of conformity to the revealed will of God. So to be pious one must sincerely seek to do the will of God as he understands it, and not merely conform to the knowledge of his ancestors. Campbell also says: “No man can be justified today by living in accordance with the knowledge that he had yesterday.”

We have here a sobering view of the nature of piety. How many of us really make a sincere effort to conform to the truth we know? When we see how Campbell has Luther saying, “I must obey the light which God has given me,” we can ask ourselves if we are responsive to the light given to us in this enlightened 20th century.

And it makes us less judgmental to realize that others can respond only to the light they have. Many people, such as the American Indians for instance, have been so blighted by ignorance and by limited opportunity that they can only be judged by the measure of light given to them. But this is part of what Paul argues in Romans, that even if people have but little light they are responsible to that light. And we all have some light, to which we are less than faithful. This is what makes us all sinners. But still we are to grant to others what the God of heaven grants to all in terms of judgment, that it is required of a person according to what he has and not according to what he has not. — the Editor