Tag: luther

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 22

95 Theses against Indulgences

by Rev. Donavon Riley

As more people of power and influence called for action against Martin Luther, the more those in authority in Rome turned their attention toward Wittenberg. It was the Dominican Order who were the most excited about calling Luther to account for his teachings. John Tetzel, Luther’s primary opponent during the Indulgence Controversy, was a Dominican too, so the order’s prejudice against Luther had already been established.

That’s why, when the principal of the Dominican monasteries in Germany, Herman Rab, attended the order’s annual meeting in Rome one of his first actions was to award Tetzel a special doctor’s degree authorized by the Pope himself. Now, with this public honor, the Dominican Order had announced they stood firm behind Tetzel and what he’d taught during the Indulgence Controversy.

Rab also used his time in Rome to explain what was happening in Germany because of Luther’s teaching. Rab talked first to friends who served the Pope. In this way, he was put into contact with Sylvester Prierias, the papal watchdog for all doctrinal matters. When Rab presented Luther’s 95 Theses to Prierias, the latter agreed that the young monk was in error. More than that, because Prierias spoke for the Pope, that meant Luther’s teachings against indulgences was an attack on the Church and an assault on the will of God and therefore heresy.

After his conversation with Rab, Prierias set to work writing his “Dialogues.” These were published in June of 1518. The papal lawyers then used the dialogues as an outline as they drew up formal charges against Martin. The legal document was passed on to Cardinal Cajetan, the head of the Dominican Order and a papal lawyer appointed to serve at the upcoming Imperial Diet in Augsburg. Lastly, Luther received his copy of the documents on August 7.

When Luther read them he knew he had a problem. This wasn’t a pointed attack launched by Eck or Tetzel. This was a papal decree. The author had the Pope’s ear. Prierias’ judgments carried the weight of God’s authority. And, worst of all for Luther, he was being summoned to Rome, not for an academic debate, but to defend himself against charges of heresy.

The next day Martin wrote to his friend, Spalatin, who served at the court of Elector Frederick. In the letter Luther begged his friend to speak to Frederick, to urge the elector to do something to get the trial moved from Rome to Germany. The young professor knew that if something wasn’t done he’d be executed as soon as he stepped foot in Rome. Only Frederick could now save Luther from a horrible death.

Next week we will examine what happened next with the trial of Martin Luther, and his defense of his teachings against charges of heresy.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 21

Johan Tetzel
Tetzel, Karlstadt, and other theologians respond to Luther

by Rev. Donavon Riley

After his Heidelberg Theses, Luther, more than ever, was under scrutiny from friends and opponents. Colleagues, like Andreas Karlstadt who was a colleague of Luther’s, wrote his own theses arguing for the authority of Scripture in matters of faith over all human opinions, even the Early Church Fathers.

On the other hand, John Tetzel, Luther’s sworn enemy since the indulgence controversy, preached a sermon entitled: “Sermon on Indulgences and Grace,” which was a direct attack on Luther’s teaching about indulgences. When he received word about this Martin said that Tetzel’s sermon treated the Bible “like a sow pushes about a sack of grain.” But, for Luther’s adversaries Tetzel’s argument had traction they could use. Tetzel asserted that the Pope had complete and ultimate authority in all matters in heaven and on earth. That meant that anyone who challenged the Pope’s word was a heretic because the Pope’s decisions, since he was the vicar of Christ, were to be heard as God’s own word.

Eck also took aim at Luther again after Heidelberg. But unlike Tetzel, Eck was a theologian of the church and his criticism held substantially more weight for Luther as a consequence. Even though he decided to say nothing, and “swallow this dose of hell” as Martin put it, colleagues pushed him to write a response to Eck. But Luther said he would not do it. He felt it would not be of any help to Christians to witness such an angry and provocative debate between theologians happening in public.

If the controversy Luther had stirred up remained amongst theologians and academics, and stayed locked behind the closed doors of the monastery and academia, perhaps Luther would have become a footnote in church history. A charismatic, if not controversial figure, on the same level as John Wycliffe or Jan Hus. However, once politically powerful, influential men jumped into the fray the stakes shifted for Luther and everyone else. Now, Luther could not protect himself simply by not responding to the criticism of theologians. Now he would have to find a benefactor to defend him from being arrested and executed.

And yet, as he wrote to a friend at the time, “The more they threaten me, the more confident I become… I know that whoever wants to bring the Word of Christ into the world must, like the apostles, leave behind and renounce everything, and expect death at any moment. If any other situation prevailed, it would not be the Word of Christ.”

Next week we will examine what was happening in Rome at this time and how the papacy decided to deal with Luther once and for all.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 20

by Rev. Donavon Riley

After Heidelberg, and the explosion it caused amongst his listeners, Luther moved to tie his teaching to the daily life of Christians. Eck’s response to the 95 Theses, and other papal critics who pushed back against what Luther had said at Heidelberg, motivated the monk to translate his theology into language the common man could appreciate. And so, in May 1518, Luther published “Resolutions Concerning The 95 Theses.”

Luther began by addressing how the papal teaching regarding confession had no basis in Scripture. God demanded a change of heart and mind, not outward works. “Doing what was in one” had nothing to do with salvation. And buying an indulgence accomplished nothing for a Christian, because repentance and penance were two different things altogether.

Martin attacked the papal teaching about confession, penance, and outward works, but his most pointed criticism was focused on absolution. He wrote, “Christ did not intend [by the power of the keys] to put the salvation of people into the hands or at the discretion of an individual.” Everything depends, Luther asserted, on “believing only in the truth of Christ’s promise.”

This meant that for a Christian that indulgences were unnecessary. However, Luther also knew, as one Luther historian wrote, “that he was including [within his critique of indulgences] pilgrimages, special masses for the dead, shrines, religious images, relics, special spiritual exercises, and much of what was central to the practice of medieval religion.”

Luther also made sure to lay out for his readers that the Roman Church didn’t possess a treasury of merits that were available to Christians for the right price. Christians couldn’t buy their way into heaven. Only Jesus Christ and his bloody suffering and death received in faith by a Christian granted him access to the kingdom of heaven. And this was offered freely to all people apart from works, merits, or a special indulgence from the Pope.

At Heidelberg one listener said to Luther, “If the peasants heard you say that [even good deeds can be sins], they would stone you.” However, in the ‘Resolutions’ Luther went further than he had at Heidelberg on this topic. “The Church needs a Reformation,” he wrote, “but it is not the affair of one man, namely the pope, or of many men, namely the cardinals, both of which have been demonstrated by the most recent council. On the contrary, it is the business of the entire Christian world, yes, the business of God alone.”

Luther signed off by dedicating the Resolutions to Pope Leo X. The monk stated simply that if anything he’d written could be disproven by the clear words of Scripture he would recant. Martin concluded by writing, “I put myself at the feet of Your Holiness with everything that I am and have. I will regard your voice as the voice of Christ, who speaks through you.”

Next time we will examine the response of Luther’s colleagues and critics to the publication of his Resolutions and other works.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 19

Luther and the 95 Theses

by Rev. Donavon Riley

Although Luther’s comments about the sales of indulgences, capped by his posting of The 95 Theses to the church door, drew plenty of attention, the young professor continued with his responsibilities as lecturer and preacher in Wittenberg. However, since he’d translated his lectures and sermons into German for laity, then back into Latin for scholars, more and more calls came to Luther requesting he expand upon or defend his theology.

One instance occurred in the spring of 1518, when Luther was invited to defend his teaching in Heidelberg. It was the annual meeting of the Augustinians, Luther’s monastic order, and he was sent as a representative of his monastery as well as handing off responsibility for his duties as district vicar to someone else. Likewise, he was chosen to be the “disputant” for the meeting, which meant he’d engage in a debate about the theology of St. Augustine, who most monks believed was the founder of their order.

Luther did not, as many expected, take up the topic of indulgences when he was given the opportunity to talk. Instead, he presented what he believed was Augustine’s theology (and his own). As Luther presented his twenty-eight theses, one after the other, those in attendance bent their ears to him, even though the first ten theses weren’t so controversial as to stir up any excitement. However, when Luther read his thirteenth thesis: “‘Free will’ after the Fall is nothing but a word, and so long as it does what is within it, it is committing deadly sin.” This was a direct attack on what everyone in the room had been taught.

Then, the sixteenth thesis caused even more excitement: “Anyone who thinks he would attain righteousness by dong what is in him is adding sin to sin, so that he becomes doubly guilty.” Luther had now twice asserted that the accepted, orthodox theology of the day led to damnation.

After he’d finished with his theses, and after business was completed, everyone returned home. And what Luther had said at Heidelberg went home with them. It was explosive stuff, the theology Luther presented, and from his Heidelberg Theses the first serious rumblings of reformation began to spread across Germany. But for as many new allies as Luther had won, in time he could as many, if not more, enemies. Now, Luther’s teaching wasn’t only threatening the sale of indulgences, but by saying that following orthodox doctrine led one to damnation, he was attacking the papacy itself.

Next week, we will examine the fallout from Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 18

An Indulgence from Johan Tetzel

by Rev. Donavon Riley

John Tetzel, as one historian described him, “was a short, dumpy, stump-preacher who was very good at the business of selling indulgences.” He was so good at it that in the Fall of 1517 he was sent to Germany to announce a special plenary indulgence that, the Papacy hoped, would bring in the amount of money it needed to finish building St. Peter’s basilica in Rome.

The special indulgence Tetzel peddled to the German people was so broad in its definition that just purchasing it seemed to be the actual means of freeing people from purgatory. Not a repentant heart, true faith, or even a desire to earn God’s grace was necessary. Money talked in this case, and Tetzel used all his skills as a public speaker to bend the peoples’ ear to his message.

Tetzel would go from town to town and deliver the same stirring message: “Do you not hear the voices of your dead relatives and others, crying out to you and saying, ‘Pity us, pity us, for we are in dire punishment and torment from which you can redeem us for a pittance’? And you will not?” Then, in his concluding appeal, “Will you not then for a quarter of a florin receive these letters of indulgence through which you are able to lead a divine and immortal soul safely and securely into the homeland of paradise?” Then at the very end, Tetzel would say, “Once the coin into the coffer clings, a soul from purgatory heavenward springs!”

In every town, Tetzel’s preaching filled money boxes for the papacy. The German people, concerned for their family and loved ones’ souls, bought indulgences in record numbers. And before anyone could reconsider their decision, Tetzel and his entourage of soldiers, musicians, and actors were on to the next town.

Due to the power of his delivery and the amount of money being gathered up, Luther knew about Tetzel’s methods far in advance of the little preacher’s appearance in Wittenberg. In fact, Luther was so upset by the news he received about Tetzel that he finally spoke publicly about it, calling Tetzel’s mission, “The pious defrauding of the faithful.” And others, following Luther, referred to it as “Roman bloodsucking.”

But, Tetzel expected this push back. It was, in his experience, normal for some amongst the nobles and clergy to oppose his work for financial reasons, if not for theological ones too. This time however, it would turn out different for him. Instead of riding out of Germany with boxes of gold and silver, a very different outcome was waiting for him in Wittenberg.

Next week we will examine what happened when Luther publicly opposed not only Tetzel, but the sale of indulgences altogether.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 17

An Indulgence from Johan Tetzel

by Rev. Donavon Riley

Despite Martin Luther’s provocative teachings at Wittenberg University—and their influence on students, faculty, local monks and priests, and earthly rulers—the theology and practices of late Medieval Roman Catholicism continued relatively undisturbed.

One such practice was the sale of indulgences. Indulgence sales were the medieval equivalent of a modern “big tent revival meeting.” An indulgence salesman would roll into town with a theater troupe, clowns, public orators, musicians, and the like. It was quite the scene when everything was set up and the show began, like a circus and stage play and concert combined!

And even though indulgence sales were a spectacle to see, their purpose was very serious. Theologians of the church had concluded that although baptism washed away the stain and penalty of original sin, Christians still had to “do what was in them” in order to be saved at the Last Judgment. However, if a Christian lived a life that was neither too wicked or too holy, they died they were sent to purgatory when they died. As a consequence, any sin that remained on their record had to be worked off (or paid off, thus the sale of indulgences) before they could be set free to enter into heavenly peace (after presenting themselves to St. Peter and Jesus at the gates of heaven). So an “indulgence” was simply how the church “indulged” a sin by absolving it of all penalty. All that was necessary to procure an indulgence was proof that the Christian was sincerely repentant over his sin. Or, if he was dead, his family or friends had to provide proof in his place.

In purgatory, the dead could not do anything to work off their sin. On the other hand, since they were in purgatory they could not commit any more sin. So, if someone could purchase an indulgence in their name, for them specifically, showing that the dead truly was repentant over the sin committed after baptism, the dead could escape purgatory. If no one came forward on their behalf, they were essentially doomed to remain in purgatory, because they could not square accounts with God.

When one did buy an indulgence, the money that exchanged hands was proof of penitence, because this was another example of self-sacrifice on the part of the one seeking an indulgence, whether while they were still alive or on behalf of the dead. And, as always, it was said by every indulgence salesman that the money which purchased an indulgence was for “the work of the church.”

In the end, indulgence sales were held in the same esteem by the church as confession, penance, and other spiritual exercises that demonstrated a Christian was truly committed to “doing what was in him” to faithfully guarantee God was pleased with him.

Next week, we will turn our attention to John Tetzel, who became the target of Luther’s anger when the young professor finally broke from his support of the Church’s practice of selling indulgences.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 16

Boy at baptismal font

by Rev. Donavon Riley

When Luther moved to correct the long-held teaching that a Christian was partly sinner and partly righteous (and this in varying degrees depending on his humility, penance, charity, and so on) he attacked head-on the medieval teaching about holiness.

Luther taught that a Christian is totally sinful in himself, but totally righteous in Christ through faith, and this was constant throughout life. That meant holiness was not something to be sought after on a progressive scale of works, but something to be enjoyed through faith in Christ. In fact, for Luther, especially based on his reading of the Old Testament, wherever God is He makes sinners holy by His presence among them. God is holy and those whom He calls into relationship with Him are thereby holy, by virtue of His coming near to them. Personal experience, spirituality, success or failure at living a god-pleasing life were irrelevant regarding holiness. One was either “in Christ” or not. And, in Christ, a Christian is totally holy, because God declares him righteous for Christ’s sake.

Luther knew that his teaching was theological dynamite. But he pushed on preaching and teaching that only someone who’d given up trying to achieve holiness for himself was prepared to receive God’s grace, which came from being in Christ Jesus.

As Luther wrote, “it cannot be that a soul filled with its own righteousness can be replenished with the righteousness of God, who fills up only those who hunger and are thirsty. Therefore, whoever is full of his own truth and wisdom is not capable of the truth and wisdom of God, which cannot be received save by those who are empty and destitute.”

Luther denied that a Christian can become better in the presence of God. All his works and doings are exposed as sinful and damned in relation to a holy God. Only the righteousness of God in Christ makes a Christian “holy.” Therefore, faith empties a person of his own desire to become holy and instead focuses him more and more on Christ Jesus. This is a Christian’s one sure and certain hope in life.

“The wounds of Jesus,” Luther wrote, “are safe enough for us…This, if anyone is too much afraid that he is not one of the elect…let him give thanks for such fear, and rejoice to be afraid, knowing with confidence that the God who says, ‘the sacrifice of God is a broken, that is a desperate, heart’ cannot lie.”

Not a single work we call “holy” impresses God in the least. Only Christ makes Christians holy. Likewise, then, only Christ can make a person “whole in hope,” as Luther noted.

Luther followed Scripture where it led him, where his questions were answered by God’s solid words about Jesus. But Luther’s whole world was populated by people who’d been taught that faith and good works led to salvation, not faith alone in Christ alone. The push back against Luther’s teaching, especially as he wrapped up his Romans lectures, was about to escalate. When Luther had taken his vows as a professor he’d sworn to uphold the truth and condemn false teaching.

By 1518, there were many who’d become convinced by what they heard coming out of Wittenberg that Martin Luther may have become confused about true and false teaching. They felt that young Luther was in need of severe correction before he misled too many priests, professors, students, and laity into damnable unbelief.

Next time we will examine the explosion that occurred when Luther publicly opposed the sale of indulgences.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 12

Wood carving of Luther rose
Saved by Christ alone

Rev. Donavon Riley

During his lectures on the Psalms and Romans, the Righteousness of God had finally gotten hold of Luther—and it wouldn’t let him loose. Like two sheepdogs, God’s righteousness in Christ, freely given in the preaching of the Gospel, pursued and herded Martin Luther day and night. It was all he could focus on. The old wineskins of Medieval theology, which taught righteousness is what we achieve in ourselves in pursuit of godly obedience burst at the seams from the new wine of Christ’s righteousness, for that righteousness is completely outside sinners, bestowed only by God’s declaration of the sinner as righteous for Christ’s sake.

Even though Luther didn’t know it at the time, he had become God’s instrument—bulldozing anything that obstructed God’s Jesus-way of salvation. No more would Christian hope and love be considered the primary signs of Christian life. Instead, grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone distinguished true Christians from the pretenders.

Now, when Luther said “grace alone” and “faith alone” he meant “Christ alone.” For him, there could be no talk of grace or faith apart from talk about Jesus crucified for sinners. To talk about grace and faith apart from Jesus, to locate grace and faith inside the individual Christian, was simply old Adam’s attempt to get to God (to be God in God’s place) and become righteous in himself. Old Adam wants to save himself, believing in the power of his own belief, and he imagines he can become his own savior with just enough effort, enough knowledge, enough obedience to the God’s commands.

Luther finally saw how faith in one’s ability to believe and obey was nothing more than a denial of Jesus’ suffering and death for the sin of the world, and a sure path to torment for troubled souls. His focus was now wholly on Christ crucified for sinners. Christ sacrificed on Calvary was God’s gift of salvation and Christ’s faithfulness to His Father’s will and to each individual sinner for whom he suffered and died, was the comfort and certainty he’d always yearned for. And, as it turned out, so had many people who heard his lectures and sermons, or read his early theses. That is, many people except Roman Catholic bishops, like Albrecht of Mainz, and others in positions of authority in Saxony and at Rome.

But, despite some grumbling and attempts to tame him early on, Luther pushed his students and others to focus on Christ instead of themselves. As he wrote in a letter to a friend in 1516, “Therefore, my sweet brother, learn Christ and Him crucified’ despairing of yourself, learn to pray to him, saying, ‘You, Lord Jesus, are my righteousness, but I am your sin; you have taken on yourself what you were not and have given me what I was not.’ Beware of aspiring to such purity that you no longer wish to appear to yourself, or to be, a sinner.”

Luther’s dogged attention to the Gospel, of Jesus alone being the sinner’s righteousness, won him many supporters and allies, but also began to attract critics and opponents.

Next time, we will look at what happened when Luther’s teaching collided with Johann Tetzel, and the explosion that resulted in Luther’s eventual excommunication.

If you’d like to learn more about Martin Luther, check out: The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther (Cambridge Companions to Religion).

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 13

Martin Luther

Rev. Donavon Riley

Martin Luther received his license to enter doctoral studies in 1512. He swore on oath on the Bible to teach true doctrine and stand strong against false teaching. Then a wool cap was set on his head and a silver ring was slid onto his finger. Luther began lectures on Genesis three days later.

Outside his responsibilities as a teacher (which began at 7:00 a.m.), Luther was also busy writing letters to friends and colleagues, preaching at the monastery, reading Bible devotions at meals, preaching in parishes around Wittenberg, serving as a student advisor, supervising eleven monasteries, lecturing on St. Paul’s letters, and preparing a commentary on the Psalms. At that time, Luther said to a friend that he was so tired by the end of the day he would collapse on his bed and immediately go to sleep.

But, for all that, Martin was still focused on reviewing and revising everything he had been taught about the righteousness of God. He said, “I did not learn my theology all at once, but had to search deeper for it, where my temptations took me.” Everything Luther did was in service to eliminating anything and everyone who stood between him and Jesus crucified for sinners.

Luther’s turn away from the theology he had learned while a boy, that was instilled in him at university and as a young monk, did not happen all at once. Instead, he grew slowly and through much temptation and struggle. Then, finally, it was during Martin’s biblical lectures that things began to lock into place for him. It was in the classroom, as a lecturer, that Luther worked out his questions. Though nothing remains of his first Genesis lectures, one can read his evolution as a theologian from the first Psalms lectures, through Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, then through another go ’round in the Psalms.

Through his lectures on the Psalms, Luther came to a startling conclusion almost unheard of in former commentaries and lecture halls. From Psalm 72, he taught the students that God did not have one, but two kinds of righteousness. Martin had only been taught the second one. God’s righteousness on the one hand was a righteousness by which He found sinners guilty of disobeying the commandments. Then, and here is where Luther began to break free of Late Medieval theology, God’s other kind of righteousness—God’s primary righteousness—was a righteousness by which He declared believers righteousness for Christ’s sake, that made them acceptable in His presence. This was a new teaching, unheard of by anyone at that time. Luther was beginning to tear down—one theological brick at a time—the wall that separated sinners from God’s grace and mercy in Christ Jesus.

Next time, we will look again at Luther’s time as a lecturer and the personal and professional consequences of his teaching.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.

Categories
Higher History

Who Was Martin Luther? Part 15

Rev. Donavon Riley

By 1517, Luther was turning late medieval theology on its head. As students and guests at his dinner table trickled out from Wittenberg and took home with them what they’d learned, Luther’s teaching also began to change the day-to-day religious practices of ordinary Christians.

Luther wasn’t just attempting to tweak the system he had grown up with, he was putting an axe to the roots of late medieval Roman Catholic theology. Monasticism, a life of self-denial, spiritual exercises intended to earn God’s favor, and the life gained a Christian nothing, Luther taught. Only the Gospel, the teachings and life of Jesus Christ, could save sinners from judgment and eternal death.

As Luther said during the Romans lectures: “We must know we are sinners by faith alone, for it is not manifest to us; rather we are more often not conscious of the fact. Thus, we must stand under the judgment of God and believe his words with which he has declared us unjust, for he himself cannot lie.”

Before this, Luther had been shown by his teachers to find the law in the Gospel. Now, as one Luther scholar wrote, Martin was shown by the teaching of St. Paul that “the purpose of the law was to drive Christians to Christ alone.”

The point Luther drew out from this was that since we are shown to always be sinners, we are always called to repent of our sin. Therefore, since we are always repenting, since we are always sinners, we are always justified by faith in Christ to whom we look for forgiveness of sin. Thus, a Christian is always a sinner, always repentant, and therefore always declared righteous on account of Christ.

This paradox confused many. Where others had tried to smooth over and systematize such (seeming) contradictions, Luther plunged into the tension. He stood as sinner and righteous at the same time, and he rejoiced because he was shown that there is where a Christian hears Law and Gospel, is put to death and raised to new life, is condemned to hell and yet is lifted up into heaven with Christ.

As Luther said in the Romans lectures: “It is not he who possesses a certain quality who possesses righteousness; rather, this one is altogether a sinner and unrighteous; but he has righteousness to whom God mercifully imputes it and wills to regard as righteous before him on account of his confessing his unrighteousness and his imploring of God’s righteousness. This we are all born and die in iniquity, that is, unrighteousness. We are just solely by what the merciful God imputes to us through faith in his Word.”

Next time we will examine how Luther’s pastoral concerns drove his teaching and preaching in the face of growing opposition.

Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.