Church Life

The Chinese Christian Behind 2,000 Hymns

Lü Xiaomin never received formal music training. But her worship songs have made her a household name in China’s churches.

An image of Lu Xiaomin.
Christianity Today December 11, 2025
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: Lu Xiaomin‌, WikiMedia Commons

At 5 a.m. every day, Lü Xiaomin kneels on the floor in a dimly lit room of an apartment in northern China. She sings a hymn aloud, reads a passage of Scripture, and prays to God. Sometimes, she meets other believers online or in person to read God’s Word together. After breakfast and a short walk, her schedule fills with ministry work, like sharing her life testimony with people or preparing Bible studies.

Lü’s lifestyle embodies the signature worship song she composed in the early 1990s, “Five O’clock in the Morning in China.” In a lilting melody, the song declares,

At five o’clock in the morning in China,
You hear the sound of people praying.
Prayers bring revival and peace.
It brings unity and victory …
Soaring over lakes and mountains,
Melting the coldest of hearts.

Lü’s vocation as a hymn writer might seem surprising, as she never received any formal music training and learned how to write Chinese characters from a dictionary while shepherding sheep in a field. But her songs have made her a household name—“Sister Xiaomin”—among Chinese Christians worldwide.

“I don’t really understand music theory, but I know the Spirit gives the song, and I just write it down when I receive it,” Lü said. “I am a grassroot, a grassroot filled with the Holy Spirit.”

Lü was born in 1970 to a non-Christian Hui-minority family in Fangcheng, a county in northern China. Her parents planned to give her away to another family when she was 10 days old, but a big flood occurred on the day this was going to happen. “It was God’s blessing to our family,” her mother said in the 2000 documentary The Cross: Jesus in China.

In junior high, Lü had a chronic sinus infection and constantly felt dizzy and nauseous. She decided to drop out of school and began working as a farmer. As she grappled with her poor health, her aunt encouraged her to come to church and told her that God would heal her.

“Often, I sat down and looked at the sky, the birds, the flowers, the trees, the grass, and the fields,” Lü said in the documentary. “In my heart, I knew all these were the works of a creator, but I didn’t know who he was and what his name was.”

After the conversation with her aunt, Lü realized that God was the creator she had been searching for. She rushed to her aunt’s home, interrupted her dinner, and asked her to bring her to church immediately. The 19-year-old accepted Christ that very night.

The following year, Lü joined the Fangcheng Fellowship—one of the largest house church networks in China—and became a lay evangelist. One night, after encountering the Holy Spirit during a rural house church revival meeting, she felt restless and could not sleep. Suddenly, the melody and lyrics of a song came to her in the middle of the night, and she burst into spontaneous worship.

This tune became the first hymn she wrote: “Bring Your Joy,” which exhorts believers to lay down their burdens and live out the gospel together. This song also sparked the stirrings of a movement known as Canaan Hymns: a collection of more than 2,200 songs with catchy, colloquial lyrics set to emotionally stirring melodies in the style of a Chinese folk song.

Lü’s initial hymn-writing endeavors were born out of the revival of Christianity in China between 1989 and 1998. This was a golden period where the faith spread outward from rural areas as believers shared a fervent commitment to telling people about the gospel, even amid suffering.

Hundreds of believers from around the country would travel to Lü’s town to worship together in the small house and courtyard of a host family. These meetings were often vibrant, overflowing with the power of the Holy Spirit, Lü recalled.

When the meetings ended, believers would take home recordings of Lü’s hymns on cassette tapes to share them with their communities. Itinerant preachers also brought her songs to other parts of China, like Yunnan and Xinjiang. Many of these preachers had little or no financial support. Whenever they met each other, they would often sing the hymn “Lord, May You Hold Our Hands” with tears streaming down their faces as they petitioned God loudly for strength and tenacity.

In the early aughts, Lü’s hymns moved from lyrics that pleaded for divine intervention and mercy to ones that professed God’s unconditional love as the church grew into maturity. For instance, the song “There Really Is a God Who Loves You” affirms that God bestows breath on us and forgives us each day. In 2002, Chinese Canadian composer An-lun Huang created formal musical scores for these hymns, helping them to gain wider recognition in churches across China and the Chinese diaspora.

From 2009, Chinese churches gradually shifted from rural house churches to more urban dwellings. Lü recognized widening divisions in believers’ demographic profiles and denominations. Her conviction to compose hymns to unite people with a common vision of their mission grew.

During this time, the Chinese church rekindled the Back to Jerusalem movement, encouraging believers to share the Good News from the east to the west as a means of fulfilling the Great Commission. Lü’s hymn “Mission of China: Preach the Gospel” captured this sentiment well: “The wheels roll, the road is long, and the Chinese church must preach the gospel. … The Holy [Spirit’s] flame has been passed down to this day, miraculously guided by the Lord.”

As Lü’s fame spread, she experienced many trials and was often the subject of nasty rumors. Once, she heard gossip that her son had a foreign father because of her trips for overseas ministry. Other times, she faced pressure to curb her efforts to share the Christian faith. Some people she shared her faith with, however, ended up watching The Cross documentary about her life and unexpectedly decided to pray to God.

Lü also came to realize she had often overwhelmed her husband with her expectations of ministry life by pressuring him to read Scripture, pray, and attend gatherings. Yet he faithfully supported her ministry and did everything with patience and dedication. She resolved to embrace gratitude and humility and view life and service from the Lord’s perspective.

Some believers find Lü’s hymns too China-centric. The lyrics of one hymn say, “China, facing the baptism of life and death / You must be in awe. Only then will China be most beautiful.” Another hymn declares God’s power and sovereignty over the entire country.

Lü is dismissive of this criticism. “China carries a double debt—not only to Jesus but also to the missionaries who once shed their blood on Chinese soil,” she said. “Why did God love China so much as to send so many missionaries here?”

Other believers feel that Lü’s hymns sound too old-fashioned. But Lü reckons that hymn writing is not about honing an artistic product to perfection in a bid to please listeners. Instead, the hymns she writes should be a channel of confession, intercession, evangelism, and mission in and through the church.

“When songs become too polished, they lose their earthiness and originality, and brothers and sisters struggle to follow [the lyrics],” she said.

Wu, a pastor in his 40s from the eastern part of China, grew up listening to Canaan Hymns. He continues to cling to these songs, as they remind him to have steadfast faith in God. The first 200 hymns Lü composed are especially moving to him, and the congregations he planted regularly sing these songs in their gatherings.

Some younger Chinese believers are committed to making Lü’s hymns sound more contemporary. In July, Christian worship group Deep Spring Band released a music video featuring Lü’s hymn “We Are Dear Brothers.” The group performed the song while beating large drums on the banks of the Yellow River, singing, “We are brothers, forever inseparable, / One Lord, one faith, one baptism, sealed with the Holy Spirit.”

Two years ago, the band recorded a music video for another of Lü’s songs, “Blessings to You, the Campus in my Heart,” which described God pouring out his love over schools in the country.

“We love Canaan Hymns because they touch our souls deeply, regardless of age,” said Yao, one of the band members. “We want [her songs] to reach out to the young generation of the digital age with this music video, as many are lost in isolation and depression.”

Lü’s hymns continue to be popular in Chinese diasporic churches in the US and elsewhere. Congregants at a Chinese church in Australia frequently sing these songs as they resonate with the lived experiences of their brothers and sisters in Christ from Mainland China, said Tin, their 60-year-old lead pastor.

In the last five years, Lü’s hymns have adopted a more prophetic tone, often urging believers to live with a sense of eschatological urgency amid worldwide crises. As the COVID-19 pandemic spread across China, she wrote “Wuhan, Wuhan, You Are Not Alone” to encourage people in the city to persevere. Another song, “You Are the Ark in the Great Flood,” proclaims God as a refuge in disaster, a beacon of light, and a home for prodigals.

More than three decades after she penned her first song, Lü continues to get up at 5 a.m. daily to pray, read the Bible, and write hymns for the Chinese church. Her greatest longing is to lead people to know Jesus more intimately.

“I must keep learning—Scripture, worship, service—not to please anyone but to obey the Spirit’s prompting,” she said.

Culture

The Surprising Joys of a Gift-Free Christmas

Amid peak consumerism season, I prayed for ways to teach my children about selfless giving.

Empty Christmas gifts.
Christianity Today December 11, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye

Three years ago, I declared to my five children, “There will be no gifts for Christmas this year.”

“But why, Mom? I already promised my friends I’d join the Secret Santa!” my eldest daughter, then a fifth grader, protested immediately.

I felt my face flush. I wanted to tell her that gift giving has nothing to do with Jesus’ birth and that we should feel sorrowful and maybe even guilty about indulging in excessive consumerism when people in Ukraine, Israel, and Palestine were undergoing immense suffering.

“There are terrible things happening in the world right now,” I replied. “Many children are having a hard time. Some have lost their parents. Some don’t have enough food. Getting gifts for ourselves at a time like this isn’t the right thing to do.”

“Okay, I guess that makes sense,” said my usually quiet second son, then a second grader—though not very enthusiastically.

“But how will we celebrate Christmas then, Mommy?” my kindergartner daughter asked, a deep frown forming between her eyes.

Her question caught me off-guard. As I searched for an adequate answer, my two toddler boys ran off with their Paw Patrol toys, blissfully unaware of what my earlier declaration meant for the holiday season. I resorted to a tried-and-true response: “We will pray, and Jesus will give us wisdom.”

Don’t get me wrong; I am not against giving and receiving Christmas presents. But our giftless Christmas became a kind of Sabbath for our family, a quiet pause during the holiday busyness. By choosing to give gifts to people in need instead, we practiced selfless generosity to remember the God who gave his own Son—his saving presence, Immanuel—as humanity’s greatest gift (John 3:16; Matt.1:21–23).

I did not know what Christmas really meant as a child growing up in the southwestern province of Jeollabukdo, Korea, in the 1990s. December 25 was a rather unremarkable day for most Koreans at the time. Traditional Korean holidays like Seollal, the Lunar New Year, and Chuseok, the mid-autumn festival, were far more significant, as people would travel to their hometowns to see their extended families and feast for several days.

Christmas was only a one-day holiday, so my family did not travel to see our extended family in Seoul. On Christmas Eve, I would act in a Nativity play or sing carols at church, but I always felt out of place as the only kid with a Seoul accent. On Christmas Day, I usually had nothing else to do but to stay home and watch American Christmas movies on TV with my two younger sisters. I quietly envied how the children in these films often discovered lavish gifts under the Christmas tree, whether from Santa Claus or their parents.

At the time, I never asked my parents for a gift. We also never had a Christmas tree—real or fake—in our tiny rental apartment. Deep inside, I longed to have one even though I knew my parents had far too many worries to care about these foreign traditions. They simply could not afford to do much, as my father’s business was on the verge of collapse.

One Christmas after I turned 14, however, my family received an unexpected present from someone who taught me what real gift giving is about.  

As I returned home from school a few days before the holiday, I met our pastor at our apartment door, looking like a real-life Santa Claus with a large sack on his shoulder. “Don’t tell anyone I was here,” Pastor Chae whispered to me.

By the time my mother ran out to thank him, he was gone. All that remained was a hundred-pound bag of rice—enough to feed our family for a month. “Oh, pastor … how did he know? We’ve just finished our last cup of rice,” my mother said in a trembling voice.

Pastor Chae’s gift to my family may have seemed mundane, but it met our most urgent need. My mother had never shared our dire financial situation with him, but he knew what we needed because he had been watching us with an aching, prayerful heart.

In all the gifts our pastor gave, he expected nothing in return—not even a word of thanks. My mother later told me that this was not the only secret gift he had given us. Once, at church, my younger sisters prayed to have bicycles they could ride. A few weeks later, there they were in front of our apartment door.

My intention in declaring a no-gift Christmas was to teach our children what it felt like to be in need. But banning gifts at Christmas without finding another way to celebrate could make the holiday feel barren, as if we were stripping away its joy.

As I prayed for ideas to make our gift-free Christmas meaningful and fulfilling, the Holy Spirit reminded me of a Bible verse: “Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same” (Luke 3:11). Christ taught us that we must love our neighbors in tangible, heartfelt ways—just as Pastor Chae did for our family. As an act of obedience to Christ, perhaps we could turn away from overindulging our desires and turn toward helping people whose needs were greater than our own.

That Christmas Eve, we gathered in our living room and watched a few carefully selected clips from the wars in Ukraine and Israel-Palestine. Although these videos did not display many violent scenes, we all felt the weight of the people’s suffering there. Tears welled up in my daughters’ eyes. My oldest son covered his mouth with his hands, while my two toddlers’ faces grew serious as their eyes stayed fixed on the screen.

Then, we read the Christmas story from Matthew 1 together. We talked about what Jesus’s birth truly meant: that he came to give his very life to save all of humanity, including people living through the horrors of war. My husband and I prayed. The three older children followed. I guided the two toddler boys to repeat a simple prayer after me: “Dear God, thank you for showing me these children. Jesus, be with them. Jesus, help them. In Jesus’s name, amen.”

With the resources we saved by foregoing gifts for each other, we looked for ways to provide tangible help to someone around my children’s age. Through a Christian humanitarian aid organization’s website, we came across Darvin from El Salvador. Darvin shared the same birthday as our oldest son, although he was two years younger. He lived on a small farm with his grandmother and some chickens. He loved playing soccer and dreamed of one day traveling to Africa.

Together, we decided to send Darvin a monthly gift of $43 for as long as he needed support. This amount would help Darvin attend school and receive health care. Despite our seemingly modest giving, I hoped he might experience the same God-given wonder my mother and I felt when our pastor surprised us with a bag of rice all those Christmases ago.

For the next two years, we reverted to the usual Christmas customs. We held a small-scale gift exchange with my sister’s family and let the children join Secret Santa exchanges at school. But this year, I’m thinking of bringing back our gift-free tradition.

“Do you want to do a no-gifts Christmas again this year so we can send something special to Darvin? Could we even start helping another child?” I asked my children recently. To my surprise, all of themincluding my youngest sons, now six and fournodded eagerly.

The next day, one of my daughters shared with her third-grade classmates that our family would not be exchanging gifts this year. “Why not?” her teacher asked in surprise.

“Because there are children who don’t have any gifts,” she replied. “And we can share ours with them instead.”

Ahrum Yoo is a PhD student in Old Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary.

Ideas

Death by a Thousand Error Messages

Contributor

Classroom tech was supposed to solve besetting education problems. The reality is frustrating for students and costly for taxpayers.

A school desk and an error icon.
Christianity Today December 11, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

Technology flooded schools during the COVID-19 pandemic. In many public school districts—particularly in states with stricter social distancing rules—there seemed to be no other realistic, affordable, and legal option to get kids back to class. But once we opened that floodgate, our children were swept away. 

I live in deep-red West Texas, where pandemic strictures were relatively few and brief; we were among the first to get our kids back to in-person school, a decision that put us on the cutting edge of putting children first during those hard years. Yet we have not escaped the misadventures in education technology that have become common across America in the pandemic’s aftermath. 

In 2023, our school district, like others across the country, made the move to become a one-to-one technology district, giving a device to each of its 28,000 students

I don’t recall anyone pausing to ask if this was a good idea. I know I didn’t. It just was: the future, inevitable, expected. Like the grown-ups who installed a computer lab in my childhood school, we wanted to prepare our children for the future. 

Looking back, the move was worth discussing from a finance perspective alone. I asked the district what this initial investment cost, but I received no response by the time of our publication deadline. However, the district website lists the replacement cost for a Google Chromebook at $312—almost $8.8 million if we were buying 28,000 of them in one go (without a bulk discount) today. 

That’s a lot of money—yet $312 doesn’t buy a particularly reliable machine. The Chromebooks my kids and their friends must use are banged-up and almost universally glitchy and slow, a constant source of low-grade tech frustration. The F key keeps popping off. The program never syncs. The whole thing crashes mid-upload. You know this kind of frustration, the sort that can make even adults with fully formed brains want to smash something.

It’s not all the machine’s fault: The kids aren’t easy on them either, knocking them off desks and dropping them out of backpacks. My niece in New Mexico said her planned school service project at the end of the year is to gather up all the broken bits and pieces of technology she finds around campus to collect for recycling.

Of course, we don’t buy a complete new set of laptops every year. But even staying the course costs money. Devices must be replaced, subscriptions renewed. Staying ahead of the technological curve means a constant flow of tax dollars to tech companies. Educational technology, or edtech, is a $163 billion industry (though some estimates place it much higher) that has enjoyed rapid growth over the last five years, mostly with dubious results.

Our district has 71 different approved devices, apps, and platforms available for campus use. Nearly half the subscriptions are paid at the district level, and the rest are covered by individual schools. It’s hard to nail down total costs, as the platforms’ websites rarely publish prices, instead requiring districts to request a quote. (Our district doesn’t release itemized expenditures, nor did it respond to my question about costs for all things technology-related in time for publication. The topline budget information that is made public, however, suggests an annual edtech budget in the seven or eight figures, likely spread across a number of budget categories.) 

In my observation, even textbooks are increasingly going digital. Sure, online “books” can’t be lost or destroyed the way paper ones can, and they can be accessed from anywhere. But they’re often maddening to use. 

A few weeks ago, for example, my eldest managed to check out one of the last remaining hard copies of the AP Human Geography textbook that her teacher had available. It’s been a saving grace on the days when the online textbook wouldn’t load for some reason or another—but assignments are still due. “Why can’t they just buy us regular textbooks?” she’s asked me more than once this year.

And it’s not just public schools like ours that have gone all-in on technology. Unless a private school has a stated goal to be low-tech—and, naturally, the sort of exclusive private schools many Silicon Valley executives choose for their own children have exactly that—it will likely follow the one-to-one device pattern of its public peers. There may be a few more time and age constraints and fancier, more functional devices, but the overall effect is similar. 

Even many homeschool curricula have moved online. I once walked into a room to find a young friend homeschooling with his phone propped up beside the computer. While the muted history video droned on and the schooling platform tracked his “engagement” time for a parent to check later, he watched YouTube on his phone. He’d figured out a way to game the assessment at the end of the lecture to achieve a passing grade, but I suspect he never did learn much history.

This is another problem with tech-based education: Cheating and short-cuts are rampant. Of course, it’s tempting to judge the adults involved: Where are the parents and teachers? Why aren’t they watching him closely? Why haven’t they taught her about integrity and honesty? It’s not the tech; it’s how you use it.

Sure, but judgments like those are oblivious to or in denial about reality. All of us struggle to manage our screen time and choose the more arduous path, including adults with greater capacity for self-regulation and deferred gratification than 7-year-olds. 

Moreover, even attentive adults aren’t omniscient, and many students understand these devices better than their parents and teachers. They know every workaround—like sharing documents in Google Classroom on the school network to maintain their school-day group chats after cellphones were banned on campus.

Seriously, ask any parent: With teens and technology, we’re always playing catch-up. In one school classroom with 25 kids, 25 devices (or 50 devices, if you’re in a district where phones aren’t yet banned), and one adult, monitoring is impossible. Students will find loopholes to avoid learning programs that they are not wrong to find dull.

But never to fear: There’s an app for that! And tax dollars to pay for it, naturally. Trying to stay one step ahead of the kids, districts like ours pay for programs like GoGuardian, the leading internet safety monitoring software that’s used by half the schools in America at an estimated cost of $4 to 6 dollars per device per year. 

Although Midland’s school district didn’t respond to a request for comment on exactly what this costs, based on known estimates, it probably works out to around $140,000 to license just this one of the 71 approved programs, for one year, for all student devices in Midland. 

Among other more controversial features, GoGuardian blocks “entertainment” sites, which sounds prudent. Of course, it’s not so straightforward in practice. According to some older students I know, coolmathgames.com easily sneaks past the program though it’s more arcade than algebra. 

Meanwhile, these students tell me, GoGuardian blocks TED Talks they’ve been assigned to watch for English class (flagged: possible entertainment) and articles their health teacher assigned them to read (flagged: sensitive content). As one student told me, and demonstrated with a screen recording, “They can’t seem to block slime videos, but they block videos about trade relations with China.”

Because teachers’ devices often have different GoGuardian settings, they’re unlikely to realize they’ve assigned blocked resources until students begin to complain, and the process to override blocks is convoluted and annoying. In many cases, the students say, the teacher just gives up and rescinds the assignment—or the students give up and resort to Google, which isn’t blocked and now offers up an AI-generated answer to the assignment’s questions at the top of the search results.

One student told me, and demonstrated with a video, that the dual-credit nursing program she’s doing through our local community college requires the use of Office 365, the online version of programs like Outlook and Microsoft Word. But her district-issued Chromebook, which she’s also required to use, limits the functions of Office 365 through safety programs like GoGuardian.

“I have plenty of crash-outs in class!” she said. It’s vicious cycle of tech frustrations, death by a thousand error messages.

Although much of edtech is sold as teacher-oriented solutions to save time and increase efficiency, it doesn’t play out that way for many teachers. Chronic tech problems can become the dull background noise of education, functionally adding the role of IT helpdesk to a teacher’s already crowded plate of job responsibilities. Sensing teacher frustrations, some students stay silent. 

With less than three weeks before the semester’s end, the nursing student finally talked to her teacher about her ongoing frustrations. The teacher was able to override the setting, resolving the conflict on her device. But the default setting remains, which means that other students in the class who haven’t sought help likely still have the same problem.

“In the end,” said another student, a sophomore doing honors-level work, “the entertainment restrictions are pretty much just hurting those of us who are serious students because we can’t get to research. They don’t affect the students spending their days on games or watching movies because there are so many ways around it.”

Carrie McKean is a West Texas–based writer whose work has appeared in The New York TimesThe Atlantic, and Texas Monthly magazine. Find her at carriemckean.com.

Theology

The Antichrist Hides in Plain Sight at Christmas

Columnist

First-century Bethlehem is not an escape from all the political chaos; it’s the epicenter.

An illustration of the beast from Revelation.
Christianity Today December 10, 2025
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

This piece was adapted from Russell Moore’s newsletter. Subscribe here.

The manger scene on your living room table might be keeping you from understanding Christmas. Those Nativity sets are, after all, how most of us want this time of year to be—safe and warm and cheery, with lowing cattle and humming angels in the background. But the actual birth of Jesus shook up the snow globe of all our expectations. In the backdrop were not little drummer boys but Roman soldiers and a bloodthirsty dictator who could not afford to lose. The Antichrist is in the Nativity too.

“I am hoping that Christmas will be a distraction this year, that I can just escape back into Bethlehem for a while and forget all the, you know, news,” a friend said to me. I get it, and you probably do too. Today’s Bethlehem is in a war zone—and it would be hard to find a place on the globe that’s not either a tinderbox or fuel for the flames. Authoritarianism is on the rise. Many, even professing Christians, now speak as if “winning” were itself a moral category. The problem for my friend—and for me—is that first-century Bethlehem is not an escape from all that. It’s the epicenter.

In the coming weeks, many of our churches will read the familiar words from Luke 2 and Matthew 2 on the birth of Christ. Many more will also read John’s words about the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us. Few, however, will remember that the Book of Revelation is a Christmas story too.

In Revelation 12, Jesus unveiled for John a picture of the entire sweep of history: a woman who cried out in labor pains and gave birth to a baby who would rule the nations, a dragon who sought to devour that child and chased both mother and baby into the wilderness. Immediately afterward, Jesus revealed the dark and mysterious vision of a “beast rising out of the sea” (13:1, ESV throughout), described in terms of a political power that seeks domination over all else. With it was “another beast rising out of the earth,” which was the religious authority giving justification for that domination (v. 11).

This is not a case of the story line shifting genres from Hallmark Channel Christmas movies in the Nativity accounts to Stephen King’s It: Welcome to Derry horror at the end. This is the same story all the way through.

The Beast rising from the sea, the imperial Roman power, is everywhere in the backdrop of the birth of Jesus. The words we will sing about and hear recited—Bethlehemno room for them in the inn—all of it is due to a decree from Caesar Augustus to count the bodies of his subjects (Luke 2:1). This was the power move of a surveillance state, counting those subject to the empire to tax them and maintain order by force.

The carved wise men in our Nativity sets ought to remind us that those same men stood before Herod, who was enraged that the stars they saw predicted the coming of a king of Israel. That’s not only because Herod wanted to maintain his own power base as a client king of Rome but also because he knew he was a fraud.

Jewish sources from the time told the story of Herod’s descendant reading aloud from Deuteronomy 17 each year about the duties and limits of kings, as that text required the king to do (v. 19). Some of these sources said the king would weep when he came to the line “You may indeed set a king over you … from among your brothers” (v. 15). Herod was not from the offspring of David. He knew the promises. He was not one of the brothers.

Herod’s descendant might have wept, but Herod did not step down. Instead, he did what tyrants do when repentance is too costly: He turned with rage against those vulnerable to his power. And he found religious scholars who knew the Scriptures well enough to collaborate with his criminality by pinpointing the geographic location of the threat but not well enough to resist the violence that every one of those prophecies would tell them is evil.

When the apostle John described the Antichrist in his letters to the first-century churches, he did not fix his attention on deciphering 666 or weird occult practices but wrote instead that the spirit of the Antichrist is at work whenever someone denies that “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4:2).

That flesh is important. Flesh and blood in Scripture is depicted as the ability to die, to be killed, to be vulnerable (Isa. 40:6–8). Nothing is more hurtable than an infant, utterly dependent on others for safety and food.

Our world right now seems especially fragile. Silicon Valley tech oligarchs are giving lectures on the Antichrist even while creating systems that promise to make us gods while surveilling us like slaves, all with a gumption perhaps not seen since O. J. Simpson vowed to find “the real killer.”

Many, knowing we are on the edge of unimaginable changes and perhaps inconceivable chaos, quote poet William Butler Yeats’s World War I poem “The Second Coming,” which laments, “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold” and concludes with those haunting words “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, / Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born.”

But every generation thinks it is the first to face the Beast. The unsettling truth is that the Beast has been slouching toward Bethlehem since, well, Bethlehem. And the Beast always looks unstoppable. Power and domination cause even people who claim the name of Christ to conclude that only by being beasts ourselves can we stop this.

Christmas carols should remind us otherwise. The beast of human power keeps getting humiliated by a baby—even when it seems to be winning. Caesar gets his census. Herod gets his massacre. But even so, the angel screams, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:10–11).

Nothing could seem more ridiculous in a world where Caesar could crucify dissenters and Herod could chase them out of the country. The world still looks like that: Survival looks like victory, safety looks like salvation, and control looks like faith.

We should remind ourselves of this. The Christmas story reeks of blood. That’s because the Incarnation is not about crowning the warmth of humanity but about tearing down the house of the Devil (Heb. 2:14–15). The good tidings of great joy are not that darkness isn’t real but rather that “the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it” (John 1:5).

Evil is in the backdrop of your Nativity set. But set your attention elsewhere. Look instead at the feeding trough, at what seems utterly unimpressive and fragile. The hope and fears of all the years are met in that box in Bethlehem. It’s beast versus baby. Only one of them will conquer.

Choose wisely.

Russell Moore is editor at-large and columnist at Christianity Today and leads its Public Theology Project.

Books

Why I Need Jane Eyre

The heroine reminds me what it means to be beloved as I raise three children who were abandoned like her.

Pieces of illustrations from Jane Eyre.
Christianity Today December 10, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

I did not know at that first meeting that Jane Eyre would be my friend for life.

It was in the teen section of the public library that I saw Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel on a recommended reading list. Classic fiction, suggested the flyer, could improve my vocabulary and help me score high on the verbal SAT. I found the book and checked it out.

At home, I got out a dictionary and steno notebook for new words and turned to the opening chapter. By the end of the first page, I had made two discoveries. One was that moreen wasn’t in my blue paperback American Heritage Dictionary. The second was that Jane and I were alike: undersized bookworms beset by rain.

Jane is self-conscious about her plain looks and small size, which she calls “physical inferiority.” I was a small kid myself, always outhit in tetherball and blocked in basketball and overcome in any one-to-one contest on the soccer field. My distinctly Japanese features, though unmentioned for the most part, seemed a barrier to easy social interactions with my classmates.

I lived in Oregon, and though I longed to ride the bus to school, it had been my lot always to walk, often alone and in the rain. I occupied myself by watching my sneakers slowly get soaked. Jane’s comings and goings, gains and losses, cares and questions, were strewn about with rain in the same way mine were.

Wet socks were only part of the problem. Constant rain, I felt, laid bare one’s native loneliness. I intuitively understood Jane’s love of books—her pastime was as existential as it was recreational. I had been searching pages for answers my whole life, treading those damp roads, when Jane met me and invited me in.


Jane Eyre is an orphan. Her parents die just after their first wedding anniversary. Uncle Reed, her mom’s wealthy brother, takes baby Jane into his home. He dies too. Aunt Reed reluctantly cares for her niece, often excluding her from family life. This domestic arrangement might be called kinship adoption. But since Jane’s situation has no legal permanency, it might more technically be kinship placement.

When kids lose their parents, other relatives are often the first to look after them. Both of my paternal grandparents had kinship placements as children. Eighteen months after my grandmother was born, right before the First World War, her mother died. Her dad took her to Japan and left her with his dead wife’s family. When my grandfather was 12, he crossed the Pacific from southern Japan unaccompanied. He disembarked in Seattle, where his aunt and uncle met him and raised him as their own.

Sometimes, no relatives are available, as was the case for my children when they first entered foster care. Kinship placement had failed. Social workers had no choice but to place them outside the family, first in one home, then a second, then a third. My husband and I were their fourth placement before we became their adoptive parents.

Ten years later, in the book, Mrs. Reed sends Jane to a boarding school. This means that by age 10, Jane has had three distinct external placements: her uncle, her aunt, and the charity school. (I suppose it’s debatable whether the uncle and the aunt qualify as different placements. Given the tenderness of one and the indifference of the other, I think it counts.)

Jane adapts to the school’s meager conditions, becoming a capable student and then a teacher. At 18, she takes a new job as a governess to a young girl and moves to Thornfield Hall, a country house owned by the wealthy Mr. Rochester. She’s the same age that foster kids are, if they haven’t been adopted, when they “age out of the system.”


Good fiction embodies virtue in two ways, writes literature professor Karen Swallow Prior: by offering “images of virtue in action,” and by providing “vicarious practice in exercising virtue.” For over 30 years, Jane Eyre has given me both.

When Jane refuses to become Mr. Rochester’s mistress, she models civic duty and personal integrity. By her gentle, faithful kindness to the lonely residents of Thornfield, she displays the fruit of the Spirit. When she forgives her Aunt Reed for maliciously preventing her from being adopted by another uncle, she shows the costly beauty of Christlikeness. As she patiently endures her loneliness and longing for family, she exemplifies perseverance and hope.

Jane’s example is noble, but it doesn’t quite explain her hold over me. I have read more edifying books than Jane Eyre for which I have no lasting love. What is so special about her?

I think it’s that Jane manages to befriend her reader. She goes from a heart-hungry, desperate little creature to a self-respecting young woman who knows what it is to be loved. Somehow her reader partakes in the process. That’s what friendship is all about, writes priest Henri Nouwen: “giving to each other the gift of our Belovedness.”

I realize that belovedness is a squishy term. But no other word so effectively describes the conviction that comes from being cherished by the king of the universe. Belovedness, writes Nouwen, is our “chosenness in God,” the personal quality of being seen by him “as precious, as of infinite beauty, as of eternal value.” In Jane Eyre, belovedness is “an inward treasure,” an “indestructible gem” that is as “pure as when it left the Creator to inspire the creature.”

Jane’s belovedness is apparent not in increasing self-regard but in confident self-giving. She spends her affection on her dying school friend Helen, her orphaned pupil Adele, her old nurse Bessie, the lonely housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax, and her cousins Diana and Mary. She loves even and especially people who don’t deserve it, including Mr. Rochester, Mrs. Reed, and her cousins. Each does her significant wrong; each receives Jane’s “full and free forgiveness.”

Yet Jane firmly resists being treated like a means to an end. Mr. Rochester wants her to run away with him; one cousin insists she marry him against her better judgment. Her repudiation of both echoes Jesus’ rebuke to Peter: “Get behind me, Satan!” (Mark 8:33). She listens to God’s voice over other influences. “Do as I do,” Jane tells Mr. Rochester. “Trust in God and yourself.”

Jane may not be much to look at, but her belovedness is irresistible. Hardly anyone is untouched by its healing power. Mr. Rochester is rich and capable, yet he is bowled over by the treasure that is Jane Eyre. Her presence, he says, is “warm and steady”; she would be “grave and quiet [even] at the mouth of hell.” He admires her open-hearted listening. And he delights in her empathy, which he calls “the suffering mother of love,” whose “anguish is the very natal pang of the divine passion.”

Belovedness brings healing. Belovedness is the source of virtue. I think of Jane not as a Christ figure but as a little Christ, someone who has become like him, offers her transformed self to others, and gives her readers vicarious practice in knowing their own belovedness.


Given her history, Jane’s ability to love others and to feel loved herself is extraordinary. The orphans I know, the ones I’m descended from and the ones I’ve raised, have much more trouble with what are vernacularly known as abandonment issues. The clinical term is disordered attachment.

I’ve never liked the word attachment. It seems much too sterile for the intricate way we come to know our preciousness and thereby affirm it in others. Attachment arises from our first and irreplaceable bond with our mother. Any injury to that bond endangers all subsequent relationships.

For my children, poor attachment has been catastrophic. Their belovedness struggles are like lifelong disabilities with no easy remedies. This is heartbreaking but not surprising. Foster kids, even when they have been adopted, remain very vulnerable. They are physically and mentally ill, have low-quality friendships, quit school, commit crimes, and become homeless at much higher rates than other children.

Absent belovedness, children internalize patterns of disconnection that stay with them their whole lives, passed down to their offspring through family dynamics and even DNA. Medical research shows that children feel the attachment stress of their ancestors, even “to the third and fourth generation” (Num. 14:18). I am no orphan, yet disordered attachment within my family meant that I inherited a chronic unease about whether I belong and how lovable I am. Getting a good SAT score was one way to make up the difference.

Jane has every right to feel shame over her broken beginnings and familial rejection, her essential homelessness. She has good reason to think she is unlovable after being duped by a lonely nobleman and coveted as a useful tool by an ambitious, thwarted scholar adventurer. But she does not. Somewhere along the line, Jane has been transformed by the pure love of God.

My three young adult children are very close in age. Between them, they are 18 on average, the same as Jane. I wish Jane could step out of the pages and tell me just how she achieved such secure attachment. But she offers no formula—only her story and her friendship.


On the first Sunday in Advent several years ago, I was late to church. Our children were seriously mentally ill, and we were all in turmoil. Our house wasn’t clean, we weren’t having nice family dinners, and we had no Christmas plans. We also weren’t getting places on time.

I sent the others ahead and walked the long way around, inhaling the damp air and lifting my hood against specks of rain. I was full of dark shame over what seemed like so much weakness and family failure. I wasn’t sure I was up for church at all—the sweetness of Christmas was meant for other people, not for my children with all their losses and certainly not for me.

I slipped between the outer wooden doors into the church vestibule, which was warmer than outside but unlit and dim. I brushed my hood back and stepped forward to pull open the door to the back of the sanctuary.

A tiny bright gleam shot out at me from the Advent candle that had just been lit at the front. Far away it seemed, yet sharp. The single point of light traveled true, as through a long shadow, direct to my heart.

Jane spoke to me then, not in words but in my mind’s eye. She was there, drenched and lost and near death on a rainy night, suddenly seeing a tiny light flicker in the distance and seized by an uncertain hope: “It may be a candle in a house,” she thinks, and struggles on.

The proliferation of orphan narratives in Victorian fiction, writes scholar Roger Lundin, was a way authors like Charlotte Brontë explored the meaning of loneliness, both personal and corporate. Fictional orphans respond to the possibility that we have been abandoned by a God who is “silent, distant, or dead.”

Jane attests that there is no abandonment. The tiny flame leads her not only to shelter but also to belonging. The house is that of relatives she didn’t know existed. She finds that she is personally precious to the one who sets the forsaken in families (Ps. 68:6). In her most desperate moments, God offers loving guidance:

I had risen to my knees to pray for Mr. Rochester. Looking up, I, with tear-dimmed eyes, saw the mighty milky-way. Remembering what it was—what countless systems there swept space like a soft trace of light—I felt the might and strength of God. Sure was I of His efficiency to save what He had made; convinced I grew that neither earth should perish, nor one of the souls it treasured. I turned my prayer to thanksgiving; the Source of Life was also the Saviour of spirits. Mr. Rochester was safe; he was God’s, and by God would he be guarded.

Since our first meeting those many years ago, my story has resembled Jane’s in this: I am not abandoned. The Lord is near, leading me home to his household. Somewhere along the line, I have come into belovedness. It is all I have to offer my children, who seem so very lost. I have no formula. I must entrust them to the Saviour of spirits. By him they will be guarded.

I moved down the aisle toward the candle and, finding the pew with my family, sat down among the worshipers.

Wendy Kiyomi is an adoptive parent, scientist, and writer in Tacoma, Washington, whose work on faith, adoption, and friendship has also appeared in Plough QuarterlyImageMockingbird, and The Englewood Review of Books. She is a 2023 winner of the Zenger Prize.

Ideas

The School Tech Situation Is Worse than You Think

Contributor

There are still good teachers doing good work. But they can only do so much when state directives and district resources push them online.

A school desk and laptop.
Christianity Today December 10, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: Unsplash, WikiMedia Commons

Over the course of one summer at my little public elementary school in White Deer, Texas, a dusty, catchall storage room under the gym bleachers was transformed into what we children came to know as a magical portal to a new world. 

It was 1989. Our community was mostly farmers and ranchers, and personal computers weren’t yet commonplace. The new computer lab, we were told, would equip us for the future.

I remember those early computer classes as both a novelty and the highlight of my week. I was cracking 50 words per minute on the typing test and dodging dysentery on the Oregon Trail—basically a technological savant! Sometimes, when we’d saved the day’s assignment to our floppy disks, our teacher would even let us play the snake game.

Even that teacher, I suspect, had no idea how technology would transform education over the next 30 years, upending decades of norms and best practices as schools chose to believe software companies’ offers of instant solutions to their trickiest problems. Too many kids in a classroom? Don’t worry—this program will help you meet children where they are! Kids bored with repetitive practice of foundational skills? We’ve turned it into a game so learning is fun!

And the transition to tech-based primary education has only accelerated since the COVID-19 pandemic. If my computer lab in 1989 is still what comes to mind when you envision computers in schools, I’ve got some bad news.

My own children are in seventh and ninth grade now, and they’ve never experienced a single day of school without working on a screen. Yes, even in kindergarten. Yes, even before they could read. In fact, I’ve never been able to determine exactly how much time my children spend on screens during the school day. They’ve never gone to a school where computers were relegated to a lab. This is the new normal in most American schools. 

This is especially prevalent in large public schools. Walk into a public elementary classroom today, and there’s a good chance you’ll see most of the children wearing headphones and working alone on devices. While screens direct the larger group, the teacher will pull small groups for one-on-one practice and instruction. 

It’s not hard to understand why this happens: Teachers with overcrowded classrooms can at least try to individuate instruction for students with different skills and needs. And it certainly gives teachers all sorts of data, immediately grading quizzes, plotting progress, and grouping kids by mastery. Under the hand of a skilled teacher, this can unlock new opportunities to customize instruction.

But what else does it do? Let’s set aside, for a moment, bigger questions about what all this technology is doing to children’s brains and whether most children can effectively learn on screens. How does it shape an average day in an average school in an average student’s life? Those days add up. They form a childhood. Here are some of the effects of tech-centric education I’ve observed over the years.

When my youngest was in early elementary and just learning to read, she’d rarely come home with books. Instead, I’d find her clicking randomly on words in a reading practice game. 

Once, I asked what she was doing. “Oh,” she said, “after you click the wrong word three times, it tells you the answer and then lets you play the game!” 

Math was the same. Both of my girls spent considerable time on Prodigy, a game with reviews such as “Mediocre game with random math problems jammed in. Spammy.” “All this app will do is provide screen time.” “Distraction from actual learning.” 

At home, I attempted to extoll the virtues of using paper flashcards to learn multiplication. Of course, the screen always won. Flashcards don’t offer dopamine hits. 

Now that they’re older, the platforms my daughters are assigned have changed, but my questions remain. Some years, schoolwork was so heavily online that even a failed math test couldn’t easily be reviewed. After all, “show your work” isn’t possible when the work is done on scratch paper that’s tossed or lost after answers are entered online. 

Parents were told the tests had to be online, though, to prepare students for mandatory, state-standardized testing—also all online. (Here in Texas, those scores have significant ramifications for school ratings and teacher pay.)

In middle school, my eldest daughter’s advanced English/language arts classes involved just one complete book in a span of two years. All her reading assignments were digital excerpts followed by multiple choice questions asked and answered on a screen. This was part of a new curriculum that promised to improve academic outcomes. 

Until then, reading had always been one of her favorite subjects, but suddenly she found it dreary and dull. And no wonder: There was no plot to follow, no difficult texts to wrestle with, no tensions to be resolved, no complicated characters to debate. Most days, she was presented with a series of disjointed paragraphs and the inevitable choice of A, B, C, or D. 

How can classes structured like this foster capacity for critical thinking or sustained attention? The way we’ve failed our children is becoming obvious nationwide. 

It’s not just my kids. An older student in our district told me that in her advanced classes, more than half of her work happens online. For her friends in regular classes, she said, it’s a much higher percentage. 

And sometimes there’s no true teacher in the room. Long-term substitutes who in some cases aren’t qualified to teach do crowd control as students (theoretically) complete online assignments generated by a computer program or a teacher they’ve never met. Only the most driven students and those with diligent, supportive, stable families will learn anything under these circumstances.

This is bleak—but it’s not all bleak. This year, for instance, both of my children seem to be less online. I don’t know if that’s due to the teachers they were assigned or different campus cultures at the schools they attend this year. (Although we haven’t changed districts, my eldest has aged into a new school, and our youngest goes to a different middle school than her sister attended.) I hope it may be the result of some growing recognition that the tech-obsessed model of the past few years hasn’t been working. 

Whatever the cause, both girls have already read more books in the first semester of this academic year—actual paper books!—than my eldest did throughout middle school. They’re doing math with paper and pencil, and the algebra teacher sometimes bans calculators.

I’m glad for this reprieve. But I worry that my first explanation—of individual teacher preferences or a strong campus culture—is the likeliest of the lot, and I know that there’s only so much that individual educators can do when all the resources and directives from their states, districts, and administrators push them toward a digital-first approach. One or two good campuses are a blessing, but our whole nation is engaged in real-time experimentation on our children’s minds, and the results aren’t looking good.

Maybe the rapid shift to tech-based education during COVID-19 was like the move to shelf-stable, processed foods during World War II: a decision of necessity. As staples like flour and sugar were rationed, alternatives like condensed milk and spam were introduced to provide a facsimile of normalcy. Food companies developed ad campaigns extolling the superior health and virtue of these foods, and it’s hard to blame them for that choice. 

But then the war ended, and we were still eating Wonder Bread with margarine and imagining it would build strong bodies. But then the pandemic ended, and we’ve still got our kids doing “math” online.

Carrie McKean is a West Texas–based writer whose work has appeared in The New York TimesThe Atlantic, and Texas Monthly magazine. Find her at carriemckean.com.

Culture

Geoff Duncan Brings Baseball Strategy to Halls of Power

How a former MLB player found God and a calling for civic service.

A baseball hit and government building.
Christianity Today December 10, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: Getty, WikiMedia Commons

Trace the history of many politicians, and you’ll often find a formative athletic experience in their background. Former representative Jack Kemp and former senator Bill Bradley both were professional athletes whose time in sports cultivated a spirit for public service. Many of our nation’s presidents played sports in college. Sports can cultivate teamwork, discipline, and a stubborn disposition toward achieving goals—qualities that good politics require. 

Benjamin Watson, an NFL football player turned justice advocate, sat down with Geoff Duncan, former Georgia lieutenant governor and former MLB player, to talk about this connection between sports and political service. Before serving as lieutenant governor, Duncan was a 69th-round draft pick from Georgia Tech for the Florida Marlins, where he played for six seasons. A lifelong Republican, Duncan announced last month that he will run for Georgia governor as a Democrat. Together, Watson and Duncan explore what it means to practice the just life and how character shapes decision-making, regardless of what team—athletic or political—you’re on. 

Here are edited excerpts of their conversation in episode 11. Watch the whole conversation here on The Just Life with Benjamin Watson, a podcast from CT Media.

Did you grow up in a family where faith was important, or did your faith come because of the tribulations and uncertainty of sports? 

My family was very faith centered. We went to church every chance they opened the doors and served a meal. I graduated from high school and went off to college with my parents’ faith, not my own faith. 

When I was drafted to the Marlins, it gave me a new lease on life to show up to work every day. Professional baseball has something called baseball chapel. Every Sunday, no matter what park you’re in, there’s a Sunday sermon given. Those chapels started to work on my heart, and my spiritual life became my journey instead of my parents’ journey. My wife and I got married and enjoyed life on the road. I learned so many life lessons playing baseball: how to control your emotions, how to be a good teammate, how to work hard, how to lean into a faith that was just starting to develop inside me.

After baseball ended, my wife and I started a business and began raising kids. Life was good. A good friend from baseball at Georgia Tech invited us to go to church with him one Sunday at Andy Stanley’s North Point [Community] Church. Stanley preached a perfectly sensible argument for why Jesus is the greatest person to follow, and I thought, This feels right. After that, our faith started to really be a catalyst. We got into a couples’ small group, and I started to unpack what Andy says so well: “What does love require of me?”

Some days, love requires me to walk upstairs and tell my kids I’m sorry because I overreacted. Some days, love requires me to have a tough conversation with somebody in the business world. Some days, love requires me to take a political stance that doesn’t jive with whatever party labels are next to my name. That’s really where it all started to develop for me. 

In 2021, you published a book titled GOP 2.0 where you say that your party moved away from conservative values. You served in the Georgia State Legislature as lieutenant governor. What are those values you feel Republicans have lost?

I was elected in a very Republican district as a state representative. When I took office, I realized that there were strings attached and this game to reach for more power and control. I soured to that early on in the process as a state representative and decided I was going to put policy over politics. 

I felt like there was a more genuine way to do the process, focused on policy, empathy, and tone. I wanted to get back to this world where if you and I disagreed on a policy and we put it out on the table, we’d probably both agree on 80 percent of that issue, no matter how toxic the issue might be. That 20 percent where we disagreed? We could work together or make concessions. Can I truly be mature enough to understand your point of view? I think that softens the edges. 

As far as tone, for some reason, we’ve given ourselves this hall pass in the world of politics. We can be as visceral as we want to be when we wouldn’t talk like that at work. We certainly don’t do it at home. Simply put, it’s more important to Americans to win an election or to be on the winning team than to have the policy. Everything is about an election cycle.

For me, this has been a journey. As time went on, I felt like I was less of a Republican and more of an honest umpire. That was the closest alignment to the mission that I felt most comfortable executing every day. I just didn’t feel comfortable going to work and only saying 60 or 70 percent of what I felt the truth to be.

How do you encourage people to come together to find solutions when everything else on the outside is telling us to stay apart?

One of the best ways to make an instant mark on somebody is to react differently than what they expect. In sports, when somebody gets up in your face and they’re expecting the same, you instead say, “All right, man. Thanks for the feedback.” It makes an impression on them. In political discussions or discourse, I ask, “What are your thoughts on this? I know we disagree on it, but how could you make this piece of legislation better?” 

I got to watch that strategy play out firsthand as lieutenant governor. I realized that when we passed legislation that was voted on only by Republicans, it was a low-quality, short-term solution. When we got bipartisan support for something, it was really wholesome stuff that you were proud of and that you knew would stand the test of time. I started taking meetings in the Democratic caucus, including groups that didn’t expect it in the discussion. 

That kind of thing helps take us in a healthy direction, but you have to be intentional. There’s no political reward for that. It’s the long game. It’s like, “Do you want to make it to the Hall of Fame, or do you just want to make one All-Star game?” I watched Ronald Reagan with Tip O’Neill, the speaker of the house, do this. There was no political rationale to it, but I saw the productive nature of that strategy. 

How have you not become disillusioned? What keeps you going?

Deep in my bones, I feel like this is the journey God wants me to be on. Just call balls and strikes and be as honest of a leader as I can possibly be. Whether that becomes an elected office again or not, who knows? I wake up energized, ready to hit the floor running. I would rather have a life of purpose than sit in the front row at some banquet every night and give a two-minute speech just to say I’m in elected office.

In 2020, I had soured toward Donald Trump. My wife and I were riding in a limo with the president and Melania. They were running me back and forth to the White House. I just didn’t like what I saw. Sitting around my kitchen table, I watched the president tweet at me. I’m getting death threats, and I’ve got three sons looking at me going, I wonder what Dad’s going to do. Is he going to do and say the right thing no matter who’s against him? I was not going to buckle in that moment. 

For me, a just life means I’m loving my neighbor. If I’m doing that, a lot of things are going to be all right. My heart’s right. My faith’s right. My family’s right. It takes more than just walking across the street to love your neighbor. You have to be in the right frame of mind. What we’re doing needs to be centered around love.

News

Massachusetts Reverses Gender-Identity Mandate for Foster Parents

Facing a lawsuit and pressure from the Trump administration, the state dropped LGBTQ policies that sidelined Christians from fostering and adoption.

A family helping a foster child.
Christianity Today Updated December 18, 2025
Catherine Falls Commercial / Getty

Key Updates

December 18, 2025

Massachusetts officials reversed course last week on a policy requiring potential foster parents to affirm a foster child’s gender identity and sexual orientation in order to receive a license.

The Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) filed an emergency regulation updating its licensing standards. Previously, the language required caregivers to agree to affirm “a child’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” Now, the language asks parents to respect a foster child’s “individual identity and needs.”

In September, the Alliance for Defending Freedom mounted a legal challenge to Massachusetts’ mandate around gender identity on First Amendment grounds, and that same month, the Trump administration sent a letter to Massachusetts officials calling DCF’s current policy a violation of constitutional rights and requesting the department revoke it. The move also comes after the Trump administration signed an executive order criticizing policies that prevented families with sincerely held religious beliefs from fostering or adopting. Similar to Massachusetts, several other states are also facing litigation for their policies.

“The Department of Children and Families’ top priority is providing a safe and supportive home for all children in foster care,” DCF commissioner Staverne Miller told Fox News Digital. “We are also committed to ensuring that no one is prevented from applying or reapplying to be a foster parent because of their religious beliefs.”

Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse celebrated the news in a statement: “Massachusetts has told us that this new regulation will no longer exclude Christian and other religious families from foster care because of their commonly held beliefs.”

According to Widmalm-Delphonse, the two religious families who are party to the lawsuit, Greg and Marianelly Schrock and Nick and Audrey Jones, plan to reapply for foster care licenses after they were denied fostering due to refusing to sign the contract. 

The conservative legal firm also plans to move forward with the lawsuit: “This amendment is a step in the right direction and we commend Massachusetts officials for changing course. But this case will not end until we are positive that Massachusetts is committed to respecting religious persons and ideological diversity among foster parents.”

Alex J. Adams, assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families at the Health and Human Services department, told Fox News Digital that “Massachusetts’ action is a good first step, and we appreciate states undertaking efforts to increase their ratio of foster homes relative to the number of foster kids.” He added, “However, it remains to be seen if this language shift will actually change state practice around how foster families are licensed. ACF looks forward to diligent follow-up to ensure the red carpet is rolled out to all foster families.”

December 12, 2025

The number of children and youth in foster care far outweighs the number of licensed foster families. Despite that, Christian families in several states have found themselves shut out of the process as a result of their traditional beliefs on gender and sexuality.

In Massachusetts, one licensed foster family lost their license, despite successfully caring for nearly 30 foster children since 2019, after they declined to sign the state’s new Foster Parent Agreement. The new agreement requires a participating foster family to unequivocally support and affirm a child’s desire to medically transition or identify as the opposite gender. Another Massachusetts couple, while fostering a one-year-old, allowed their license to expire after they informed the state they couldn’t sign on to the policy. 

The Christian legal firm Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has sued on behalf of families in Massachusetts, Vermont, Oregon, and Washington who risk having their licenses revoked or, in some cases, have already lost their licenses due to refusing to sign policies that violated their consciences and religious beliefs. 

In Washington state, officials declined to renew the foster care license of Shane and Jennifer DeGross after they refused to sign the new regulations.

“Every child deserves a loving home, and when the state puts ideology above children, and when Christian families who exercise their faith are discriminated against, it only harms children, and it decreases the number of foster families,” Shane DeGross told Fox News. “Foster families do an incredible job of standing in the gap for these children, so when the state discriminates against people of faith, only children are harmed.”

Religious freedom advocates and faith-based foster care and adoption groups hope a recent executive order (EO) by the Trump administration will lend support to plaintiffs in several of these cases where families have been barred from adoption or foster care due to disagreement with state policies on sexuality and gender.

The EO seeks to address the foster care crisis in myriad ways, from modernizing information and data-collection practices to establishing more scholarships and services for youth who are aging out of the foster care system.

The EO also condemns policies adopted by states and localities that “discourage or prohibit qualified families from serving children in need … because of their sincerely-held religious beliefs or adherence to basic biological truths.” And it directs the Health and Human Services Department to “take appropriate action” in response, including evaluating states’ partnerships with nongovernmental organizations, including faith-based ones.

“We have every reason for confidence that there will be robust action by the executive branch to ensure that faith-motivated organizations and families are fully welcomed into child welfare programs by states and counties,” said Jedd Medefind, president of the Christian Alliance for Orphans, which represents 300 organizations focused on children and families. Medefind also formerly led the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives during George W. Bush’s administration.

American Enterprise Institute senior fellow Naomi Schaefer Riley wrote in an analysis that parts of the order are “long overdue.”

“Not only did the last administration encourage this kind of unlawful discrimination, but states continue to act in unconstitutional ways, keeping great foster parents from serving because they will not, say, support hormone therapies or surgery for kids who think they have been born into the wrong bodies,” Riley wrote.

In 2023 under the Biden administration, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed a rule change related to the placement of foster children who identify as LGBTQ. It called for LGBTQ foster children to be placed in homes “free from hostility” or “discrimination” and required prospective foster and adoptive parents to affirm a child’s gender identity. This rule change gave the green light to states to adopt policies limiting who could serve as foster or adoptive parents.

ADF senior counsel Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse told Christianity Today it’s not yet entirely clear how states will respond to Trump’s EO, which calls for the reverse posture, but ADF intends to press forward with the legal challenges regardless. 

“The state has every incentive, especially when their operations are being funded by federal funds, to comply with federal law and at the same time not to put politics above children’s best interests,” Widmalm-Delphonse said.

A 2022 study from Child Trends found that 57 percent of funding for child welfare came from state and local sources. Around 43 percent came from the federal government. The largest source of federal child welfare funding came from Title IV-E of the Social Security Act, while Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and the Social Services Block Grant program also made up a portion of federal aid. The federal funds, in addition to providing for a child’s general health and well-being, also provide financial support to caregivers, foster parents, group homes, or grandparents and other relatives caring for foster children. 

Widmalm-Delphonse said many states are facing shortages of licensed homes, to the point where they have, at times, housed children in undesirable and unlicensed temporary placements, such as hotels and hospitals. Some states have made efforts to reduce these kinds of placements, but decreasing the number of families has only added to these challenges.

“I don’t think you have to agree with our clients’ Christian beliefs to see that these types of exclusionary policies are not in children’s best interest,” he added.

As of 2024, nearly 330,000 children were in the foster care system, while some estimates say there are less than 200,000 licensed foster homes. Around 20,000 students age out of foster care each year, according to the Department of Education. 

Barna Research found in 2024 that practicing Christians are twice as likely to foster and adopt when compared with the general population and that 65 percent of foster parents say they attend church services weekly.

Herbie Newell, president and executive director of Lifeline Children’s Services, a Christian nonprofit that focuses on adoption, orphan care, and foster care, said the order simply allows Christian families to fully participate alongside everyone else: “It doesn’t bar anyone. It just simply protects. It protects Christian foster families, Christian foster agencies, and Christian adoption agencies from being able to live out their closely held religious beliefs and their statements of faith.”

In its 2021 case Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the city of Philadelphia could not bar Catholic Social Services from placing children in foster homes due to its policy of working only with married heterosexual couples.

The court issued a narrow decision holding that the agency did not fall under the purview of public accommodations laws and that Philadelphia’s antidiscrimination law burdened the Catholic agency.

The Supreme Court has not yet currently weighed in on whether religious families can be prevented from fostering due to their views on gender and sexuality.

Widmalm-Delphonse with ADF said he views Fulton as “the blueprint that lower courts should follow to make sure they respect the religious liberties of foster parents as well.”

Newell said that, while he celebrated the news as a good first step by the administration, the relief it may provide will be only temporary, as an executive order could be reversed by a subsequent administration with different views.

Newell said he trusts that Christians will find ways to care for vulnerable children regardless of whether the federal government encourages or discourages participation.

“We don’t need an executive order to have a mandate to care for orphans and vulnerable children,” Newell said. “No matter what the government does to try to bar us or include us, we’ve got a mandate from the Lord.”

Ideas

A Christmas Conspiracy for Zoomer Men

They’re not wrong to believe in a contested world. But they’ve misidentified the villains.

A manger on a red spiral background
Christianity Today December 9, 2025
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: Unsplash

When Tucker Carlson sat across from Nick Fuentes and let him speak without resistance, what followed was justifiable outrage, with all the predictable clips and think pieces that comprise another round of culture-war exhaustion.

Alongside the spectacle, something quieter was happening. Young men, those with no platform of their own, were listening—not because Fuentes is insightful (he isn’t), but because he speaks with the confidence of someone who claims to know the truth behind the curtain.

That’s the appeal. And the appeal isn’t unique to Fuentes. Spend five minutes on TikTok or Telegram, and you’ll hear young men swapping “hidden knowledge” about shadow elites, global cabals, secret networks, and World War III prophecies. You can even fall asleep to their murmurings.

Some of them are absurd. Some of them are wicked—especially the antisemitic sludge Christians must condemn without qualification. The deeper question is why any of it resonates at all.

The easy explanations are condescending: ignorance, gullibility, too much internet. These might comfort pundits, but they do nothing for pastors. The truth is more straightforward and, unfortunately, sadder. Young men are reaching for stories big enough to make sense of the world they inherited—a world where 9/11 shattered innocence, smartphones rewired childhood, institutions failed publicly, the pandemic disoriented everything, and politics turned into a circus of incompetence.

These men were raised inside a narrative vacuum. No shared history. No moral tradition thick enough to hold them in its embrace. No binding account of who we are, what we’re for, or why anything matters. When you take away the big story, people go searching for smaller ones.

And conspiracy theories offer a plot.

Every conspiracy comes with the same cast: the villain (sometimes “the elites,” sometimes “the Jews”), the enlightened remnant who “really see,” and the prophet broadcasting from his bedroom at 2 a.m. It’s recycled Gnosticism with better microphones. Everyone else is asleep. You, however, are woke.

For young men who feel powerless, anonymous, and atomized, this lands like a revelation. The world feels hostile; conspiracies explain why. Life feels unfair; conspiracies tell you who to blame. Your private frustrations sharpen into purpose. You’re not drifting anymore; you’re decoding.

Oddly, this all gives me a bit of hope.

Not because conspiracies are good—they often aren’t—but because the longing beneath them is honest. Young men already assume the world is morally charged, spiritually contested, and shaped by invisible forces. They’re not materialists; they’re intuiting a dimension of reality that their inherited narratives never equipped them to name. They sense what Scripture has always said: The world is not purely material, not fully rational, and not finally explained by institutions or elections. Their mistake isn’t believing in a contested world. It’s misidentifying the villains.

“We do not wrestle against flesh and blood,” Paul writes, “but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness” (Eph. 6:12, ESV). Scripture names the real conspiracy—sin, death, and the Devil conspiring to deform creation—and then answers it with a counter-conspiracy stronger than darkness ever anticipated: God entering history in weakness to overthrow those enemies through love.

Isaiah lived in a version of the same uncertainty as ours. Surrounded by fear, rumor, and lies that masqueraded as clarity, he warned God’s people against mistaking the plot: “Do not call conspiracy everything this people calls a conspiracy. … [The Lord Almighty] is the one you are to fear” (Isa. 8:12–13). The prophet wasn’t denying invisible forces; he was redirecting trembling minds toward the only power actually steering history.

And the resolution arrives one chapter later, when Isaiah widens the lens and identifies the promised King: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given” (9:6). The Lord of Hosts, Isaiah suggests, isn’t a shadowy operator but a coming ruler whose authority is carried forward not through fear of hidden players but through trust in a publicly revealed ruler. The true threat was never hidden elites. The true King would never stay hidden.

C. S. Lewis wrote of Christianity as the true myth, the story that satisfies every human longing for meaning because it is—uniquely—both cosmic and concrete. You could just as easily call it the one true conspiracy theory—not because it trades in paranoia, but because it names both the unseen powers Scripture says are at work and the God who overrules them. It exposes evil without obsession and ends the plot not in resentment but in resurrection.

This is precisely where modern conspiracies collapse. They can reveal villains, but they cannot reveal a Savior. They sharpen suspicion, but they cannot bear the weight of hope. They hand you a plot with no path forward, no one to become. The Christmas story, by contrast, proves that God’s plot does move forward. And it moves you with it.

In A Million Miles in a Thousand Years, Donald Miller describes his friend Jason, a father watching his teenage daughter drift toward a destructive crowd. Nothing worked—not rules, not lectures, not consequences. She wasn’t just disobedient; she had stepped into a story that felt thrilling, dramatic, and dangerous.

Jason figured he needed to give her a better one. So he signed their family up to help build an orphanage in Mexico. At first his daughter rolled her eyes. Then she asked questions. Then she started posting updates. Soon her bad-news boyfriend was gone, the habits loosened, and the old life simply fell away. Not because Jason confronted every issue but because his daughter had stepped into a bigger story, and the smaller one lost its power.

Zoomer men who are swept into conspiracies are living in a similar scenario. They’ve found a story buzzing with urgency that never asks them to become better men. They’ve inherited a cast of villains but never a calling. They’ve been handed a purpose-shaped emotion without a purpose-shaped life. What they need is what Jason’s daughter needed: a story that asks us to grow up and, subsequently, take up our cross.

That’s why we shouldn’t only despair over rising conspiracy thinking. We should also take heart. Jesus told us what to expect: “The harvest is plentiful.” (Matt. 9:37) Not hopeless. Not lost. Simply waiting for someone to sow better seeds and then reap what grows.

We won’t shepherd young men by mocking them out of conspiracies or coaxing them back into civility. We won’t fix this with better algorithms or more fact-checks. We won’t help by pretending the world is simple when they already know it isn’t.

Debunking alone won’t stop conspiracy theories. We have to out-story them.

Fortunately, Christians have been doing that for millennia. Ours is the only story bold enough to name the real enemies—sin, death, the Devil—and the only story strong enough to promise their defeat. It is the story where the King conquers by being crucified, where the grave isn’t the end, where resurrection is not a metaphor but a fact. It is the only narrative that doesn’t leave men in the dark but calls them into the light.

No basement broadcaster can match that. No “secret knowledge” guru can compete with a kingdom that has outlived empires. The gospel is still the biggest, truest, most demanding conspiracy theory on earth—and it remains the only one that can actually make men new.

Luke Simon is the codirector of student ministries at The Crossing in Columbia, Missouri, and an MDiv student at Covenant Theological Seminary. He has written on Gen Z, technology, masculinity, and the church. You can follow him on X.

Ideas

Christ Welcomes Us So That We Might Welcome Him

The Incarnation is an act of divine hospitality, and the church is the cohost.

Adoration of the Shepherds by Rudolf Schiestl

Adoration of the Shepherds by Rudolf Schiestl

Christianity Today December 8, 2025
WikiMedia Commons / Edits by CT

For the first seven years of my childhood, my family lived in government-subsidized housing in an urban part of Jackson, Mississippi. You could see the weathered gray vinyl siding and rust-red accent panels of our low-rise apartment building from US Highway 80. The walls of our small four-bedroom apartment were a flat beige, and our windows overlooked a school and a Service Merchandise store.

Day after day, my three siblings and I watched our parents work two jobs, sometimes three, so that our family could keep the lights on. Our shared struggles and misfortunes created a peculiar sense of solidarity among our tight-knit community, even as we each longed to find our place in the wider world.

One memory in particular captures my desire for belonging in those early years: My Uncle Johnny would promise my siblings and me, “I’ll come pick you all up and take you somewhere fun,” but he would never show up. I’d wait at the smudged screen door, watching every car that passed, my stomach sinking with each one that wasn’t his. After a while, I would realize he wasn’t coming. So I’d slip off my shoes, go back inside the house, and turn on the cartoons to drown out the noise of my disappointment.

This kind of hope-deferred waiting isn’t unique to me. It’s what many of us experience in a world that overpromises and underdelivers. We wait. We hope. We believe a promise fulfilled will come and bring us a different life, one where we are always welcomed. But so often the world never shows up in the way we want.

This is what makes the story of Christmas so radically audacious: Only God keeps his promise to come to us, to welcome us into his plan. Only his humble arrival is the fulfillment of every yearning the world could never satisfy. Only in this act of divine hospitality do we find where we truly belong.

Yet at Christmas we might hear the story of God coming to us and remain unmoved, forgetting that in Christ, God extends to us the most extraordinary act of divine welcome this world has ever known.

The scandal of Advent is not only in the fact that Christ came but also in the people he came for and the way he arrived. The creator of the universe chose to become a holy temple of flesh, entering his creation through the womb of a teenage girl of lowly means. God chose the very space marked by the pronouncement of judgment (Gen. 3:16) to become the birthplace and proclamation of redemption (Matt. 1:21; Luke 1:35).

Divine hospitality begins not in places of lofty grandeur but in the overlooked margins—the places society often deems unworthy of our attention. It’s here I have come to understand what God’s welcome looks like for a girl in the projects looking to belong: extravagant.

It is good news for us that God’s welcome is neither abstract nor distant. It is as real and tangible as his body, which held space in a mother’s womb. Advent invites us to remember that God more than makes room for his people; he entered our world and dwelt intimately among us (John 1:14). In Jesus’ incarnation, divine hospitality takes on flesh, proving the promise of the prophet Isaiah to be true: “The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in a land of deep darkness, on them has light shone” (Isa. 9:2).

In his coming, God not only draws near to us but also receives the humble welcome of those who open their hearts to him (Phil. 2:6–8). This is the beautiful exchange at the heart of Advent: God welcomes us so that we might welcome him and, in turn, one another.

Yet how easily we can make the season of Advent a declaration of Christ’s presence without his priorities, a celebration of the blessings of God’s kingdom without the ways of the King: humility, holiness, and the honoring of others. To rejoice in Christ’s coming while neglecting his calling is to miss the very purpose of his arrival.

A true acknowledgment of Advent moves us toward a celebration that expresses itself in service. Many find themselves waiting for the promise of hope and belonging to be fulfilled this year, whether they have lost jobs, have been displaced, or are unwelcome in the spaces that once felt like home.

Into that ache of belonging, Paul’s words in Romans offer a clear invitation that reflects Christ’s hospitality toward humanity:

Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God. For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, so that the promises made to the patriarchs might be confirmed and, moreover, that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. (15:7–9)

The greatest testimony the world will notice is not the decorations hung on our mantels but the visible outworking of God’s arrival beyond the manger into our very lives. This is the captivating and scandalous beauty Advent was always meant to display.

When we invite someone into our lives, whether that person comes from the margins of society (where Jesus first arrived) or from a place the world celebrates, our togetherness is rooted in the awareness that, because God came close to us on earth, we can come close to God and one another.

If the Incarnation is the ultimate act of divine hospitality, then the church becomes the host, embodying the welcome of Christ far and wide. Advent is an opportunity to participate in God’s redemptive welcome.

Though I did not have the words as a child to articulate it fully, my community in the projects drew together because of shared need. Even with the financial constraints surrounding us, we had one of the most welcoming communities I’ve ever known. We welcomed others into our lives and were welcomed into theirs.

As children of God, we come together in recognition of our emptiness, our struggle, our communal need for the grace only God can give. The incarnation of our Savior means that we are no longer left waiting at the door for a promise that is never fulfilled. God came near, bringing with him the kind of welcome we long for but rarely find in this world.

Advent reminds us that divine hospitality begins with God making room for us in Christ. It continues as we make room for God and mirror the scandalous grace of Bethlehem.

Oghosa Iyamu is the author of the six-week Bible study Forever Welcomed, which traces God’s impartial love throughout the grand narrative of Scripture.

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube