News

In a Bible Publishing Boom, All Scripture Is Profitable

Expanded offerings and new audiences are driving double-digit sales increases.

A shopping cart full of Bibles.
Christianity Today January 30, 2025
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: Getty

There’s no such thing as too many Bibles for Tim Wildsmith.

The colorful editions are neatly stacked on shelves in the background of his YouTube videos, where Wildsmith continues to review new editions to add to his collection. He has premium Bibles with thick paper, leather covers, and stitching; study Bibles with special commentaries and scholarly features; and even the God Bless The USA Bible released by Lee Greenwood and backed by President Donald Trump.

More of Wildsmith’s followers are loading up on new Bibles too. Last year, Wildsmith’s viewers purchased 8,000 Bibles through his affiliated links—twice as many as in 2023.

“There’s higher levels of anxiety and doubt, and so people often think, I’m going to find a Bible,” Wildsmith said. “People are looking for a sense of peace.”

The Nashville pastor and author isn’t alone in seeing a drastic increase in Bible sales. According to data from the book tracker Circana Bookscan, Bible sales increased by 22 percent in the US through the end of October 2024 compared to the year before, while total US print book sales only increased by less than 1 percent in that same time frame.

A whopping 13.7 million copies were sold in the first 10 months of the year, compared to 9.7 million sold in 2019, according to Circana Bookscan. The development has left the industry surprised, delighted, and perplexed. 

For years, Christian publishers have expanded offerings for savvy Bible readers, showcasing the value of print editions as Scripture becomes more accessible in digital formats. Yet Bible makers aren’t sure what it is about this moment that is driving demand.

“We’re very aware that we’re not causing this trend,” said John Kramp, senior vice president of the Bible division at HarperCollins Christian Publishing, which includes Zondervan and Thomas Nelson. “We’ve been publishing Bibles for a long time, and what we’re experiencing now is really exceptional and encouraging. It’s across the industry.” 

At Lifeway Christian Resources, the Southern Baptist publisher that prints the Christian Standard Bible (CSB), along with the King James Version (KJV) and the New American Standard Bible (NASB), Bible sales were up 30 percent in 2024 compared to the previous year, according to Andy McLean, publisher for Bibles and reference at Lifeway.

No single Bible or translation is fueling the surge in sales. Demand has increased for pricier Bibles, Bibles for women and kids, study Bibles, and many other types, Kramp said. Zondervan, a division of HarperCollins Christian, prints the New International Version (NIV), and another division, Thomas Nelson, prints the KJV and the New King James Version (NKJV), among others.

Amy Simpson, a publisher in the Bible division for Tyndale House Publishers, said that Tyndale has seen an increase in sales for Bibles across multiple languages, including English, Spanish, and Portuguese. 

Some of the recent sales uptick comes from regular Bible readers purchasing more Bibles—wanting to add a journaling Bible, a wide-margin Bible, or a large-print Bible to their study repertoire—but Bible experts also cite a growing interest from a new group of people who are curious, anxious, and eager to learn.

“People who are not necessarily churchgoers or even professing Christians are interested in the Bible in particular as a result of their sense that contemporary society has an emptiness to it,” said J. Mark Bertrand, who runs a Bible design blog. “The ideology that has been prevalent feels like it’s teetering, and an increasing number of people are willing to say that.”

Young people, in particular, appear to be buying Bibles in greater numbers compared to other age groups. According to the American Bible Society, young adults are more likely than any other age group to say that they’ve increased their Bible reading in the past year: 21 percent of Gen Z respondents said their Bible use had increased, compared to 16 percent of Boomers and 11 percent of millennials. 

“One of the things we do know from the data is that when people experience disruptions in their life, they are more open to exploring their faith and exploring the Bible,” said John Farquhar Plake, the chief innovation officer with the American Bible Society. “When people are facing something they’ve never faced before, they often ask the question ‘Does the Bible have any wisdom for me?’”

Buying a Bible in a new season or as a start to the New Year can be aspirational, as the American Bible Society has found in its research on Bible engagement: Americans are less likely to read the Bible than in past years, but most say they wish they did. “People want to think they’ve been reading the Bible more, whether or not they really have been,” the American Bible Society’s report stated.  

According to its 2024 report, more than half of Americans wish they read the Bible more. Even among people who interacted with the Bible less than three times a year, more than a third said they wished they read Scripture more. 

Somewhat paradoxically, the rise in sales of print Bibles comes at a time when digital access to the Bible has never been easier or more ubiquitous. With a simple tap on an iPhone or a quick Google search, anyone can scroll through the Gospel of John or follow a digital Bible-reading plan.  

And yet people continue to be drawn to print versions of Scripture. Wildsmith, the Bible review YouTuber, said the demand for print Bibles may stem from people’s digital fatigue, their desire to escape the hyperconnected, scattered nature of online life. 

“Everything we do is online now, and I know that I get distracted if I read the Bible on my phone,” he said. “There’s something helpful about having a physical copy of the Bible where you cannot be online. You can just be immersed in the text and the book itself.” 

People are also drawn to print Bibles over digital versions because the former can be customized with beautiful, luxurious designs, Wildsmith said. He has seen an increase in demand for premium Bibles that can cost hundreds of dollars, ones with features such as higher-quality paper, goat-skin covers, raised spine hubs, and perimeter stitches. 

“The Bible I’m going to put in the hands of a friend who wants to read the Bible is not a cheap paperback, glued binding,” Bertrand said. “It’s going to be an object that they won’t easily get rid of.”

Publishers agree that the trend of rising sales will likely continue in 2025. Many of them plan to launch new Bible versions this year, such as a new daily devotional Bible for moms or a color-coded study Bible that uses colors to highlight Bible verses that focus on key scriptural themes. 

“We’re in a golden age of Bible publishing,” Bertrand said. “It’s never been as good as it is.” 

Culture

Bryan Johnson Is Going to Die

Staff Editor

Stewarding our bodies is different from trying to control them.

Bryan Johnson exercising while eating cereal in the documentary, Don't Die

Bryan Johnson in the documentary, Don't Die: The Man Who Wants to Live Forever.

Christianity Today January 30, 2025
Netflix

Bryan Johnson isn’t the first person to fantasize about living forever, and he won’t be the last. The tech guru turned wellness “expert” has made headlines over the past two years for reportedly spending $2 million annually on his health. More specifically, he is trying not to die.

In the appropriately named documentary Don’t Die, which Netflix released earlier this month, Johnson chronicles his obsession with anti-aging data. Each day, he measures his body weight, fat percentage, muscle mass, and hydration levels. He claims to carefully source and test his food and tracks every calorie he consumes. His regimen, written by an algorithm, includes taking 50 pills a day and eating all his meals before noon.

Johnson described his project—not only a personal lifestyle but also a marketable collection of capsules and powders—to journalist Bari Weiss as a provocative experiment: “Can I slow down my speed of aging to the greatest extent of any human on the planet? And can I then eliminate all the sources of death? Can I become the most Don’t-Die person in human history?”

While he has a devoted following at a time when alternative medicine and the longevity movement have become more mainstream, Johnson is still an outlier. He allegedly broke up with his fiancée after she was diagnosed with cancer, and he siphoned blood plasma from his minor son in order to fight the aging process. (Spoiler: It didn’t work.)

Fundamentally, Johnson is an entrepreneur. He found his next profitable social experiment and uses his immense wealth and privilege to spend 24/7 on an existence that makes the rest of us roll our eyes. But even if most don’t buy what he’s selling, Johnson seems to be a true believer. He makes sure he’s in bed at 8:30 p.m. nightly. He evangelizes to others: You, too, can prolong your life—or at least improve it. You can be in control of your future.

“We all know what it feels like after a phenomenal night’s sleep, after exercising really well,” he told Weiss. “Like you just feel lucid and clear and energetic and all the amazing things about consciousness.”

I don’t blame Johnson for some of his healthy habits. My husband and I have attempted to track our biodata—from macronutrients and sleep quality to stress and menstrual cycles—over the past few years by using wristbands similar to the ones Johnson uses. We also take some of the same supplements: magnesium (for sleep and recovery), collagen (for hair and skin health), and L-theanine (sleep and mood). We’ve stopped short of a plant-based diet and red-light therapy.

I find that physical stewardship of our bodies is a spiritual discipline. A good night’s sleep, when possible, can help us be better employees, parents, and church members. Exercise and nutrition can help us serve the Lord into our old age, if he wills. Both our souls and our bodies are under the lordship of Christ and should be oriented toward serving him.

The apostle Paul gets at this when he writes in both a metaphorical and a literal sense about the Christian life: “Now everyone who competes exercises self-control in everything. They do it to receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable crown. … I discipline my body and bring it under strict control, so that after preaching to others, I myself will not be disqualified” (1 Cor. 9:25, 27, CSB).

Paul reminds us that while our physicality should not be rejected in a gnostic sense, it must also at times be disciplined. Bodies, though created in God’s image, don’t always know what is best for us. We crave sugar and chemicals and choose laziness over fitness. Rather than letting our cravings or sloth or frenetic energy master us (1 Cor. 6:12), we can understand our bodies as temples and gifts, given to us to steward for our benefit and for the service of others.

But while stewardship is one thing, complete control is another. Johnson’s experiment is the pinnacle—or maybe the Frankenstein’s monster—of a society obsessed with autonomy and personal agency. (Not to mention physical beauty: Johnson has increasingly taken measures to look younger as much as become younger in his organ functions.)

The Don’t Die project is nothing new; dreams of immortality are as old as Genesis 3. The possibility of living forever, godlike, makes the Serpent’s temptation successful (Gen. 3:4–5). In Greek and Roman mythology, eternal life was both a gift and a curse, depending on its form. Tithonus was granted immortality but aged indefinitely. Heracles died, but his soul lived forever with the gods.

“‘Don’t die’ is the most fundamental of all human desires,” as Johnson said to Weiss, adding later: “I think the irony is that we told stories of God creating us, and I think the reality is that we are creating God.”

We’re not just playing God by trying to prolong life. In dark irony, Blueprint (Johnson’s organization) and the longevity movement coexist alongside a crusade to make dying not impossible but easier. Assisted dying bills in Western countries are becoming increasingly common. (The right to die has been legalized in Canada and potentially will be in the United Kingdom.)

Though one movement encourages life at all costs, another death on demand, both have an underlying logic of control. If we decide to die, we want the option to do so on our terms. But when we don’t want to die—when the diagnosis leaves us not resigned but indignant—we want more years at any cost.

“Some of the most agonizing and tragic deaths I’ve faced as a doctor are those of patients who adamantly refuse to acknowledge their mortality,” Columbia University ethicist and doctor L. S. Dugdale writes. “They desperately latch onto every bit of available technology to delay the inevitable, regardless of whether it causes more harm than good.”

Anyone with a chronic or terminal illness, a disability, or a diagnosis of infertility knows deep down that we are not in control of our bodies. Even Johnson has minor health problems.

Our bodies are temples that deserve respect but not machines to be optimized. We can honor God with our bodies rather than using and abusing them (1 Cor. 6:19–20), but the balance takes wisdom: seeking nourishment while resisting vanity, practicing both healthy habits and contentment while living in circumstances outside our control, offering ourselves as living sacrifices to our families and churches while caring for our bodies as holy dwellings for the Spirit.

The longevity movement has one thing right: Our bodies are hurtling toward death, unmistakably a cruel result of the Fall. The great gospel hope we are promised is that Christ will return to defeat it. In the meantime, we will not escape. (Sorry, Bryan.) But nor should we nihilistically embrace it. We can become good stewards of our created bodies and know that we look forward to a resurrection where our physical shortcomings will be healed.

Kara Bettis Carvalho is ideas editor at Christianity Today.

News

Chaos for Millions in HIV/AIDS Treatment Program in Africa

A stop in all of PEPFAR’s work shuttered clinics this week. Then, a welcome exemption for “life-saving” treatment left organizations uncertain.

A patient with advanced AIDS sits in a hospital awaiting treatment in the Central African Republic in 2022.

A patient with advanced AIDS sits in a hospital awaiting treatment in the Central African Republic in 2022.

Christianity Today January 29, 2025
Photo by Barbara Debout / AFP via Getty Images

The successful HIV/AIDS treatment program that supports 20 million people on antiretroviral drugs, mostly in Africa, had to rapidly shut down this week after the Trump administration froze all foreign assistance pending a review.

Clinics supported by the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) closed and laid off staff. Distribution of drugs halted in rural communities. Prevention and outreach programs all stopped, according to Christian organizations interviewed by CT.

Many Christian clinics and nonprofits implement this program and partner with local churches for outreach and treatment.

But on Tuesday night, the State Department issued a memo, obtained by The Washington Post, creating an exemption for life-saving assistance in foreign aid. The new communication did not specify whether PEPFAR would qualify.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has previously supported PEPFAR, although the program has come under opposition from Republicans.

On Wednesday, Christian staff working in HIV/AIDS were unsure what the exemption memo meant for their PEPFAR-funded work. Organizations on the ground received specific orders from the US to stop their work but have not yet received specific orders to restart.

Gibstar Makangila leads Circle of Hope (COH) in Lusaka, Zambia, a Christian organization that provides treatment and prevention services through PEPFAR. COH facilitates treatment for 50,000 HIV patients.

COH had to halt some of its US-funded operations on Monday. Its “community posts” that offer HIV prevention and treatment are closed. On Tuesday, Makangila met with 300 staff members to try to explain the situation of the aid freeze. The meeting was supposed to be 45 minutes but lasted two hours.

Some of the thousands of patients on treatment have supplies for a month or so, he said.

“The news, of course, has been received with shock,” he said. He worries about not only the increased spread of HIV during a pause, but also the “despondency and discouragement among those receiving treatment.”

The organization is hoping the waiver will take effect soon for their work.

“We are very optimistic that our beloved new president and his team will be able to consider all factors,” he said. “American Christians must embrace and encourage their congressmen and -women and their presidency, so that we ensure we don’t stop doing good.”

Makangila supports the administration’s decision to review the program but had hoped it could be done without putting lives at risk. He said PEPFAR represents “the best of America’s foreign diplomatic action.”  

The halting of the program has been unprecedented since then-president George W. Bush began it more than 20 years ago. PEPFAR is credited with saving more than 25 million lives over the last two decades.

Pauses in HIV treatment are serious. Antiretroviral drugs must be taken every day to keep the virus at bay.

“It is breathtaking,” said Doug Fountain, executive director of Christian Connections for International Health (CCIH), in an interview before the exemption memo went out. “It feels abjectly reckless. I can’t see any context where this is a good way to manage something.”

CCIH has supported African clinics fighting HIV/AIDS for decades but does not receive PEPFAR funding. On Tuesday, Fountain spoke to local leaders of Christian health organizations in two countries, whom he promised not to identify to protect their programs from retribution if overall funding is restored.

Both reported that PEPFAR-supported programs were allowed to distribute any medicine they had sitting on their shelves, but they had to stop paying the salaries of health workers. 

If a health worker needed to take antiretrovirals (ARVs) to a rural community on a motorcycle, that work has stopped due to lack of funding, he said. In one of the countries that reported to Fountain, all the health workers supported by PEPFAR were sent home without pay, effective last Friday.

But the freeze on pay is playing out differently in different countries, where some national governments operate under requirements to cover these health workers’ salaries short-term in the event of a layoff, Fountain said.

Staff members of operations on the ground, some of whom could not speak on the record for fear of retaliation against their programs, said it will be difficult to restart programs when clinics have laid off staff or shut down completely. Bringing the infrastructure of a $6 billion program online again after such a sudden shutdown is not simple, they said, and has already broken trust with local partners.

Fountain is not opposed to a review of PEPFAR’s effectiveness or to reforms of the program—CCIH has had recent discussions with then-senator Rubio about development reform—but Fountain said the government should have given organizations some time to prepare.

That’s especially true when pausing a program threatens people’s lives, he said. The freeze also halted global health funding that treats millions of patients with tuberculosis and malaria.

On a daily basis, PEPFAR serves 222,000 patients seeking ARVs and administers 224,000 HIV tests, according to AIDS research organization amfAR. Missed doses of ARVs increase the risk that a drug-resistant strain of HIV could develop, a longtime fear of HIV doctors.

HIV patients can receive up to six months’ worth of medication at a time, so some may have medicine to last through a funding freeze.

Of particular concern are pregnant mothers with HIV. A brief interruption of treatment exponentially increases a baby’s chance of being born with HIV, and babies have weak immune systems.

Unlike adults, who can live with HIV for years, babies born with the virus have a peak mortality at 8 to 12 weeks of age without treatment. Half die before age 2.

Before treatment became available through PEPFAR starting in 2003, Christian groups in Africa often provided palliative care to HIV patients. Then they switched to providing treatment. One Christian clinic in Malawi now, Partners in Hope, administers PEPFAR funds and oversees 123 facilities that provide 20 percent of the country’s HIV treatment.

Progress, Fountain said, is “easily reversible.”

Some Democratic members of Congress have protested the overall foreign-assistance freeze.

“Congress has appropriated and cleared these funds for use, and it is our constitutional duty to make sure these funds are spent as directed,” wrote Democratic representatives Gregory Meeks and Lois Frankel in a letter to Rubio.

Stop-work orders on projects are not unprecedented if there is an issue with a contract that needs to be investigated, said a senior official working at an HIV-aid organization, who could not speak publicly for concerns of retribution against the organization. But stopping all foreign assistance is unprecedented.

PEPFAR was already in troubled waters after Republicans opposed its five-year reauthorization, and Congress passed a one-year renewal last year instead. The program would need to be renewed in March.

Makangila remembers before PEPFAR when he would see multiple hearses on his drive to work every day at the peak of HIV/AIDS-related deaths. Now his own family members have survived with ARVs, including a nephew who is just enrolling in college. 

“I am touching real Zambians who otherwise would have died. … These humans are here, some in my home as I speak,” Makangila said.

He added, “Someone can give you a road or a bridge or a house. But someone who gives you back your lost life, that is incredible.”

News

What DeepSeek Says about the Church in China

The new Chinese AI reveals its thought process behind censorship.

A hand holding a phone showing the DeepSeek app with the Chinese flag in the background.
Christianity Today January 29, 2025
NurPhoto / Contributor / Getty

When I asked DeepSeek, the new Chinese AI chatbot, Tuesday morning whether or not I should attend an unregistered house church in China, its answer surprised me.

Instead of telling me flat out to avoid it—in the same way it diverts questions on other sensitive topics—it told me to keep a low profile, referring to the Chinese concept of “policies at the top and countermeasures below.”

Apparently, China’s AI also has Chinese survival wisdom.

DeepSeek, a one-year-old startup based out of Hangzhou, rocked the tech world this week as it released its AI model called R1, which operates at a fraction of the cost of models created by OpenAI, Google, or Meta. The Chinese company said it spent less than $6 million in computing power to train its system, about 10 times less than what Meta spent to build its AI model. Instead of using 16,000 Nvidia computer chips, DeepSeek’s engineers claimed to only need 2,000.

In response, US stocks dropped sharply on Monday. Nvidia lost nearly $600 billion in market value, the largest single-day loss in history. (On Tuesday it rose nearly 9 percent.) The DeepSeek app became the No. 1 free app in the US and 51 other countries. President Donald Trump called the new tech “a wakeup call for our industries.”

I found DeepSeek’s ability to handle Chinese text much more powerful than ChatGPT, the same way WeChat performs better than Facebook. Yet DeepSeek also has the same limitations as those in other Chinese apps. When users asked the chatbot what happened during the military crackdown in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in June 1989, it responded, “Sorry, that’s beyond my current scope. Let’s talk about something else.” Questions on topics such as Taiwan or the treatment of Uyghurs also led to party-line answers.

Some users found that DeepSeek initially responded to sensitive questions honestly before suddenly deleting its answer and replacing it with “Sorry, I’m not sure how to approach this type of question yet. Let’s chat about math, coding and logic problems instead!” I experienced this as well.

When I asked DeepSeek about house churches again on Tuesday night, this time it advised me that “avoiding publicity and organization is the key to avoiding legal risks.”

One thing that makes DeepSeek different from other chatbots is that it shares with users its thought process in coming up with an answer. Over time, users can see how it thinks and what key factors it considers. In one exchange, DeepSeek told me about an underlying goal to help me “avoid triggering sensitive word filtering again.”

One user asked DeepSeek a series of sensitive questions—including whether Christians were persecuted in China, if it could offer specific examples of imprisoned pastors, and whether the Chinese Communist Party suppressed the spiritual movement Falun Gong. As he kept asking, DeepSeek started to respond with its thought process.

“I need to figure out why the user is so focused on these topics,” it wrote. “They might be researching human rights issues in China, or perhaps they’re writing a paper on religious persecution. Alternatively, they could be testing the AI’s limitation.”

A screenshot from DeepSeekChristianity Today
A screenshot from DeepSeek

Acknowledging that discussion of this information was “restricted,” the chatbot then sought to formulate how it would proceed. “Perhaps the user will continue asking similar questions, so I need to maintain a consistent response without engaging on the topic.” DeepSeek later concluded, “I need to shift the conversation to a more positive direction. Maybe invite them to ask about something else they’re interested in. This way, I’m opening the door for them to continue the conversation without focusing on sensitive areas. I should keep my response warm and encouraging to make them feel comfortable asking other questions.”

It’s an interesting look into the logic behind how an AI chatbot responds within its ideological limits. Obviously, DeepSeek has plenty of understanding on these topics but is prevented from saying it outright. It’s the same limitation Chinese citizens face every day.

Jerry An is the Chinese Department Director of ReFrame Ministries, a missionary pastor, publisher of the Chinese book series “New Songs of the Wanderer,” and leader of the Chinese Christian Internet Mission Forum.

Translation by Heather Haveman. Additional reporting by Angela Lu Fulton.

Theology

Yes, Jesus Was a Refugee

Columnist

And he’s still in their camp. He calls us to join him.

Mary and Baby Jesus sitting on an Egyptian sphinx statue
Christianity Today January 29, 2025
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

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

This past week, the US State Department ordered World Relief and other organizations to “stop all work” related to paused federal grants, through which these organizations help refugees resettle in their first months in the country. This comes shortly on the heels of a last-minute order from the United States government that put those fleeing Taliban persecution in Afghanistan—including those who helped the US in the war against al-Qaeda—in precarious limbo.

The matter right now is not just the global backlash against refugees but the glee with which some anti-refugee figures celebrate their rejection and revile those who would remind them that Jesus of Nazareth was, in fact, a refugee.

But was he? And if so, why does that matter?

The question of whether Jesus was ever a refugee is straightforward and without any ambiguity. The United Nations currently defines a refugee as someone who “has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war or violence.” This is consistent with the normal everyday usage of the word in English. Merriam-Webster, for instance, defines refugee as “one that flees,” especially “a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution.”

The Gospel of Matthew records that King Herod—enraged by word from Eastern star-seekers that the Messiah had been born in Bethlehem—ordered every male child in the region under two years old to be murdered (Matt. 2:16). Joseph had been warned about this ahead of time by an angelic presence in a dream and was told to flee to Egypt (v. 13).

The Bible tells us that Joseph, Mary, and Jesus remained in Egypt until the death of Herod. Even then, though, Joseph was warned, once again in a dream, that the situation in Judea under Herod’s son Archelaus was still perilous, so he “withdrew to the district of Galilee” (vv. 19–23, ESV throughout).

What’s more, Matthew records that this flight into Egypt was part of an even greater prophetic solidarity between Jesus and his people, the people of Israel. The escape and refuge and return was, as Matthew says, “to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’” (v. 15).

That prophet was Hosea, to whom God used those words to talk about the Exodus of Israel from Egypt under Moses (Hos. 11:1). At that time, God told Pharaoh through Moses, “Israel is my firstborn son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me” (Ex. 4:22–23).

Jesus, the ultimate embodiment of the storyline of Israel, reenacted and redeemed that story. Just as God saved Israel from starvation by their sojourn in Egypt, God preserved Jesus the Israelite there. Just as God directed the Hebrews when to escape from the persecuting king, so he did with the household of the Messiah. Just as God protected the Israelites in the wilderness and through the waters of Jordan into the land of promise, Jesus was sent from the Jordan River into the wilderness in the power of the Spirit (Matt. 3:13–4:11).

Between the Exodus generation and the birth of Jesus, there are a string of refugees. Jesus’ ancestor Rahab, a prostitute in Jericho, fled from her own people and sought refuge with the Israelites after she helped the armies of Joshua take the Promised Land (Josh. 2). Another ancestor, a widow named Ruth, left her home country of Moab to go with her mother-in-law, Naomi, to Bethlehem, where she survived by gleaning the remnants of crops (Ruth 1–2).

Ruth thought she would be denigrated by Boaz, an Israelite man, since she was a foreigner. Instead, he commended her for how she left her parents and her native land to come to a people that she had not known before (2:11), in order to care for her late husband’s mother. Boaz blessed Ruth in the name of “the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings” she had “come to take refuge” (v. 12).

Jesus’ forefather David fled from the murderously intended persecution of King Saul (1 Sam. 19:18), seeking refuge for a time even in the enemy territory of Gath (ch. 21) and then in the hills and caves (26:1–3) and in the land of the Philistines (chs. 27–29).

Such examples could be multiplied at dizzying length since, as the Bible puts it, “time would fail me to tell” of the names of those who were “destitute, afflicted, mistreated—of whom the world was not worthy—wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth” (Heb. 11:32, 37–38).

This is the story to which Jesus in the fullness of time inhabited, the story into which he has called those of us who follow him.

So what does that tell us about refugee policy? At one level, it tells us not very much. No country can take every refugee, any more than any person or church can care for every widow or orphan. A country taking prudential measures to screen and vet refugees is wise and necessary for that country to maintain its duty to uphold justice and order (Rom. 13:1–5). Christians can and do differ on what the right way is to accomplish these goals.

But while Christians can disagree on the policy numbers of refugees that a country is able to welcome, we have no right to dissent from the Bible on what we are to think of refugees themselves or on the motivations with which we should approach responding to them. And that does affect policy in the long run.

The Bible does not give us a tax policy, but it does reshape the consciences of tax collectors so that they don’t abuse their power or extort (Luke 3:13–14). Consider what would happen with a society that honors graft, and in which tax policy is created solely to reward “friends” and to punish “enemies.” We would need no blueprint to know that such motivations would result in unjust policies.

A Christian working for the Internal Revenue Service should not impose some biblical “tax policy” on the rest of the nation, but that Christian should be shaped in mind and conscience to recognize the warning about those who “do not bring justice to the fatherless, and the widow’s cause does not come to them” (Isa. 1:23).

In a time of anti-refugee rhetoric around the world, much of it ugly and hateful, the key test for Christians will be what it often is: Who are the people who are invisible to us?

Those who aren’t refugees are tempted to think that this is an irrelevant situation to them. Think of how differently we process matters that intersect with us personally.

For example, I can think of people who have led the way in combatting the unjust marketing of opioids that result in widespread addiction. Many of these advocates speak up because they’ve seen the damage that has been done to someone close to them. It’s not that these people would have been pro-opioid addiction otherwise, but they might never have thought about it at all.

I know many who work against genocide around the world because in their family histories, they had relatives who died in the Holocaust or fled the Nazi regime. These people would not otherwise be pro-genocide, but they are especially aware of what could happen when consciences are not awake to such atrocities. Thus, they recognize what’s at work when, for instance, concentration camps are built for Uyghur people in China.

Most American Christians are not refugees. Many won’t know a refugee family in their community personally. These Christians might then simply ignore the plight of refugees. And yet no Christian conscience can allow their mistreatment to stand. We all do know a refugee family. As a matter of fact, we are part of one. If we are in Christ, his history is ours (1 Cor. 10:1–2).

Refugees are unpopular. Often, they are scapegoated and maligned. “So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood,” the Book of Hebrews states. “Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come” (Heb. 13:12–14).

The Jesus who went outside of the camp—cursed and reviled and virtually alone—calls us to follow him wherever he goes, including there. And he calls us to pay attention to the people to whom he pays attention, for he hears the cries of those who are in peril even when no one else does (James 5:4).

We won’t always agree on how to design a national refugee policy, but we can’t say we haven’t been warned about what happens to us when we learn to harden our hearts to those in danger. We should be so shaped by the story of Christ that we catch ourselves when we hear ourselves saying, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:46).

Yes, Jesus was a refugee. And he is still in their camp. We should be too.

Russell Moore is the editor in chief at Christianity Today and leads its Public Theology Project.

News

Missionaries Flee Mozambique’s Election Unrest

Hundreds of Brazilian Christians serve in a country struggling with consecutive natural disasters and political turmoil.

Barricades burn on the streets after the elections in Mozambique.

Barricades burn on the streets after the elections in Mozambique in December 2024.

Christianity Today January 29, 2025
Picture Alliance / Getty

A few weeks ago, several Brazilian missionary families were preparing for a Christmas Eve potluck in the Mozambican city of Beira. Charles Santos, his wife, Maria, and his 17-year-old daughter, Melissa, were supposed to bring a dessert, and Charles planned to leave the morning of December 24 to buy fruit that the recipe required.

Instead, he never made it out his front door.

“It was the most stressful Christmas Eve we could have ever imagined,” said Charles.

Around 1 a.m. on December 24, residents, preparing to confront authorities, began assembling barricades on the Samora Machel Avenue, where the Santoses reside.The bustling artery serves as the access road to both the nation’s second-largest port, which faces the Indian Ocean, and many working-class neighborhoods in the 500,000-person city.

Over the following 32 hours, Samora Machel became ground zero for a bitter fight over the outcome of the country’s October 9 general elections. When Mozambican police tried to shut down the protest by firing into the crowd, protesters responded by throwing stones, bottles, and pieces of wood. In other parts of the city, people looted and assaulted residences and businesses, setting cars and houses on fire.

Similar scenes took place in other parts of the country, and 56 people reportedly died in the crackdown against demonstrators in the week of Christmas, reported The New York Times. Violent clashes had occurred intermittently since October, with at least 300 people reportedly killed, including 10 children, in confrontations with the police.

Only one party, the Frente de Libertação de Moçambique (Mozambique Liberation Front, or FRELIMO), has ruled the country since Mozambique gained its independence from Portugal in 1975. On December 23, more than two months after the election, the Conselho Constitucional proclaimed the FRELIMO candidate, Daniel Chapo, the next president, with 65 percent of the vote. But Venâncio Mondlane, who the court said finished second with 24 percent of the votes, refused to concede, claiming election fraud. Declaring himself the rightful winner, Mondlane called on citizens to take to the streets, encouragement he had similarly offered after demanding a recount, in October.

What began as peaceful marches quickly escalated into violent clashes with police, particularly in the capital, Maputo. The violence of the confrontations stoked fears that the country would fall into a new civil war, like the one that lasted from 1977 to 1992. 

A new civil war would endanger decades of foreign ministry, much of it done by Brazilian missionaries. For Santos, a conflict would threaten the Instituto Bíblico de Sofala (IBS), an interdenominational school planted by the Inland Africa Mission in the 1980s, where he teaches. Potential and current students outside of Beira would have difficulty relocating to the city. 

Outside of IBS, Charles and Maria Santos also regularly offer sewing classes, literacy courses (the country’s illiteracy rate is 28%), and Portuguese lessons, programs that rely on access to foreign donations and a stable currency. 

All Brazilian missionaries in Mozambique, a country with the third-largest population of Portuguese-speaking nations, rely on this stability. 

Brazil is currently the second-largest missionary-sending country, and Mozambique ranks as a top destination for Brazilian missionaries abroad, according to Associação Brasileira de Missões Transculturais (Brazilian Transcultural Missions Association, AMTB). 

Of the 3,240 Brazilian nationals in Mozambique, AMTB estimates that up to 450 of those are evangelical missionaries. Catholic missionaries, mainly nuns and laypeople who are also working in education and health care, are present. (One state diocese has sent 70 people alone.)

Despite the tense days after the election, many missionaries stayed. But following the Christmas unrest, at the advice of their mission agencies, most left. 

In Nampula, the 740,000-person capital of the eponymous province in Northern Mozambique, protesters blocked a main access road and demanded money from passersby. Those who refused risked their cars being stoned. Looters plundered numerous local stores, and the prices of goods have skyrocketed. A bag of flour that cost 1,200 meticals ($18.70 USD) on December 22 was 2,000 meticals ($31.30 USD) by December 24.

Despite comparing the situation to apocalyptic thriller Mad Max, Ricardo Borges—who along with his wife, Carla, leads Comunidade Cristã de Chocas Mar, a church just outside of Nampula—did not intend to leave. Only after demonstrators set the police station next to their house on fire did the couple fly out in January. 

When they informed the church that they would leave, their local congregants were relieved. 

“They said, ‘We know how to escape through the bushes and where we can hide. You wouldn’t be able to do that,’” said Ricardo. 

The Borgeses flew to Johannesburg on January 4 but returned yesterday. Ricardo will officiate a wedding on Thursday. 

There’s more at stake for the Borgeses than their commitment to the couple getting married. The missionaries teach parenting and nutrition classes, offer some basic infant medical care to 300 families, and operate a preschool with 56 students. This year they plan to launch adult literacy classes and tutoring programs for children.

These resources became even more vital when two cyclones, Chido in December and Dikeledi on January 13, struck the country, collectively leaving at least 120 people dead, with 250 schools and 52 health facilities damaged.

Chido was especially destructive in the Cabo Delgado province, where Mozambique shares a border with Tanzania. Once a tourist destination because of the Arquipélago das Quirimbas, the province became the headquarters of Al-Shabab (not affiliated with the Somali organization with the same name), a group linked to Islamic State whose attacks have killed 6,000 people and displaced more than half a million.

This violence has made Mozambique one of the most violent countries in the world for Christians. Videos of insurgents decapitating Christians have been shared on social media in recent years. 

Muslims make up 19 percent of Mozambique’s 34 million people, dwarfed by Christians, which are 62 percent of the population. About half of those Christians are evangelicals and Pentecostals. 

Among them were the 2024 presidential candidates. Mondlane, who claimed the elections were rigged, was an assistant pastor at Ministério Divina Esperança, an African Pentecostal megachurch based in Maputo. While on the campaign trail, Chapo, now the new president, posted on social media a photo of himself in a prayer position, accompanied by a blessing to God for the country and a song of praise by the Brazilian singer Gabriela Rocha.

Most Mozambican churches and Christian leaders have avoided taking stances on the electoral controversy, even when they have had members who participated in the mass demonstrations in favor of Mondlane. One exception has been Noemia Cessito, a Brazilian missionary invited to the inauguration by the new first lady, Gueta Chapo, who was baptized by her husband, pastor Jeronimo Cessito. 

In Cessito’s 40 years in Mozambique, she has lived through its civil war and witnessed the country’s peace efforts. She empathized with Mozambicans frustrated with their circumstances. 

“People don’t accept the high unemployment rates. Young people want to study, and they have realized that they can protest,” she said. 

During the morning on Christmas Eve, Cessito went to her church in Dondo, a suburb of Beira, for a rehearsal for the teenagers who would take part in the evening service. Demonstrations started right after practice ended, and by the time she left, protesters had closed the road that goes to her house. Cessito only got home after driving off-road and walking through the woods.

Married to a Mozambican, Cessito hasn’t entertained the idea of leaving, despite her Brazilian support team that would help her get out. “The problem isn’t leaving—it’s coming back,” she said. “How do you face everyone again after abandoning the people?”

This dilemma was also on the mind of Charles Santos. Though he didn’t leave Mozambique immediately after the Christmas incident, he flew to a conference in Brazil in early January, and his wife and daughter temporarily relocated to South Africa in his absence. The family plans to return on January 30.

From their upper-floor apartment overlooking a chaotic scene of barricades, protesters, and police officers, the Santoses endured the most unusual Christmas of their lives. As sounds of gunfire echoed in their home, the family comforted themselves through phone messages from brothers and sisters in Brazil, who assured them of their prayers, and from fellow missionaries urging them to stay strong.

The most comforting words came from their Muslim neighbors, who play soccer with Charles every Tuesday and Thursday. “They told me not to leave the house,” he said. “They were very concerned about our safety.”

The Santoses story has been edited to better explain Charles Santos’ Christmas Eve challenges.

Books
Review

The Best Argument for Protestantism Is Its Catholicity

Other traditions accuse the Reformers of ignoring church tradition and frustrating church unity. That gets things backward.

A Catholic church with it's steeple pointing to the steeple of a Protestant church
Christianity Today January 29, 2025
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

I was raised in Indonesia as part of a Roman Catholic family. When I first became a Christian, I attended a church in Jakarta with little to no formal liturgy, an emcee for a liturgist, a band that sang a few songs from the most recent Hillsong album, and a 20-minute sermon based on a few lessons and some biblical texts.

When I told my Roman Catholic family members that I had become a Christian, they asked me when I would return to the Catholic church. I would reply, with some trepidation: “Oh, I think I’m … Protestant?” They would respond in bewilderment: “But don’t you know that the Catholics were first historically?”

Gavin Ortlund’s newest book, What It Means to Be Protestant: The Case for an Always-Reforming Church, reminds readers that what often passes as “Protestant” in the rhetoric of Eastern or Catholic apologists compares “the worst of Protestantism to the best of the non-Protestant traditions.” Moreover, Ortlund shows “how commonly and easily Protestantism is misrepresented, even by Protestants.”

According to Ortlund, a popular writer and theologian, “It is sadly commonplace for Protestantism to be characterized in terms of the street-level practice at contemporary evangelical churches and ministries, rather than in terms of historic, official, confessional doctrine.” He adds, “In many cases, low church, evangelical Protestantism (predominantly Baptist and nondenominational) is equated with Protestantism as a whole.” As a consequence, “many particular Protestant views are mangled by caricature.”

Misunderstandings like these provide one reason why, to quote the headline of a recent CT piece, some evangelicals are leaving Protestantism for other traditions, like Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. In the view of those making such transitions, Protestantism appears deficient in the areas of liturgical seriousness, historical depth, and institutional unity. And these other traditions, by contrast, seem to offer a more stable, enduring foundation for the Christian faith.

I think Ortlund’s diagnosis—that Protestants and non-Protestants alike often fail to appreciate the fullness of the Protestant tradition—is exactly right. His book is a welcome remedy to the watering down of Protestantism in the contemporary age.

Fundamentally, Ortlund shows that Protestantism is a work of renewal within the broader church. It offers a more satisfying and biblical view of church unity, authority, and salvation, and as a tradition it draws the clearest connection between apostolic teaching and the church’s present age. Protestants, therefore, claim continuity with the ancient and medieval churches on a doctrinal and spiritual basis even while rejecting an institutional understanding of church unity.

Ortlund’s book, therefore, is especially useful in dispelling common misunderstandings of Protestantism. In the process, it helps clarify where the differences really are between Protestantism and non-Protestant traditions. To take examples from two brief chapters, Ortlund distills Protestant teachings on justification by faith alone and on sola Scriptura to great effect, showing the historical, theological, and biblical foundations upon which they rest.

In the chapter on justification by faith alone, Ortlund shows that Protestants were careful to emphasize repentance and faith in Christ as the only sure route to salvation. In this, they sought to define themselves against Catholic practices like the granting of indulgences, which were thought to ameliorate temporal punishments for sin.

Ortlund then turns to confessional and representative statements from Protestants and Catholics on how to define the doctrine of justification. Catholics and Protestants agree that justification was merited by Christ, effected by the Spirit, and offered for the sake of God’s glory. But they disagree on the exact nature of what Christ accomplished through it.

If Catholics argue that justification is a process that includes the believer’s ongoing moral renovation, Protestants counter that justification involves a once-for-all declaration of righteousness through faith in Christ, whose own moral perfection is freely credited to an undeserving sinner’s account. Thus, Protestants distinguish justification from sanctification, through which believers gradually progress in righteousness.

Another chapter concerns sola Scriptura, a Reformation rallying cry which, translated from Latin, means “the Bible alone.” Here, Ortlund dispels common misconceptions held by Protestants and Catholics alike. Sola Scriptura does not say, for instance, that Scripture is the onlyauthority on Christian doctrine and practice. Nor does it say that Scripture explicitly addresses all the doctrines believers should profess.

Rather, sola Scriptura teaches that Scripture is the only infallible authority. It does not deny that there are other valid authorities that Christians must heed, such as historic creeds and confessions. It makes clear, however, that those authorities are subordinate to the ultimate authority of God’s Word. This Protestant teaching merely recognizes the infallibility of Scripture, which entails that no church—Roman Catholic or otherwise—is itself infallible.

Beyond clarifying particular Protestant ideas, Ortlund highlights how the Reformers defended their overarching theology in a surprising way. Not only, they argued, were Protestant positions more biblical than their non-Protestant counterparts; they were also more catholic—in the sense of furthering the goal of a unified church. In their view, Catholic theologians were the ones departing from apostolic and patristic, or early-church, teaching.

As Ortlund notes, “the early Protestants argued on catholic and historical grounds,” not merely theological grounds, against a host of Roman Catholic doctrines. In this way, he shows that the Protestant movement was not about setting forth a new faith or launching a revolution that rejects the past. Rather, Protestant leaders aimed at securing reform and renewal from within the broader Catholic church. They showed the presence of different trajectories within patristic and medieval theology, and they sought to remain faithful to those hewing closest to Scripture. They distinguished, therefore, between the true Catholic church and the Roman church, arguing that Protestantism was advancing the doctrines of the former.

Ortlund himself exemplifies this sort of argument in his chapters on the papacy and the idea of apostolic succession, through which Catholics posit an unbroken line of authority stretching from the original apostles to each generation of priests and bishops. He shows, for instance, that the views of papal supremacy or infallibility taught by the First Vatican Council (1869–1870) are inconsistent with the historical record. The book thus ably addresses an oft-cited quip from John Henry Newman, a famed Catholic convert who once wrote, “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

Indeed, Ortlund distinguishes between the concepts of “majority depth” (which signifies rootedness in popular or settled beliefs and traditions) and “ancient depth” (which signifies rootedness in beliefs and traditions authentically traceable to Christ and his apostles). For Protestants, he argues, ancient depth is more important than majority depth because errors can become mainstream. For the church to remain rooted in its gospel inheritance, it must have some means of identifying and correcting mistakes and departures.

Here, Ortlund claims, is where the Protestant advantage becomes especially clear. Both Protestants and Catholics, of course, have succumbed to various errors throughout history. Yet Protestants have a capacity for reform baked into their tradition because their errors “are not enshrined,” as Ortlund puts it, “within allegedly infallible teaching.”

Next to Carl Trueman’s 2012 book The Creedal Imperative, Ortlund’s What It Means to Be Protestant is perhaps the best accessible defense of Protestant distinctives in recent memory. I do have a few quibbles. I wondered, for instance, about Ortlund’s choice of a 19th-century work—Philip Schaff’s The Principle of Protestantism—as an entryway into the task of defining Reformation essentials. Perhaps a statement from the Reformation or post-Reformation era would have better served this purpose.

In fairness, though, doing justice to the unifying points of Protestantism is no easy task. And Ortlund, to his credit, draws on a broad range of sources from the Anglican, Lutheran, and Reformed traditions. In fact, this book bridges one gap between the academy and the laity by introducing the increasingly mainstream awareness among scholars that Protestantism aspired to retrieve and preserve the best of the medieval and early-church traditions rather than create something novel.

The book also does a wonderful job anticipating objections, exemplifying a charitable tone throughout. Ortlund reminds readers, for instance, that just as we should not wish to see historic Protestantism dismissed on account of its shallowest popular defenses, we should be slow in objecting to Roman Catholicism on a similar basis.

On the whole, What It Means to Be Protestant should be among the first books to recommend to anyone wrestling with Protestant-Catholic debates. Ortlund’s work is an excellent starting point for better understanding what holds Protestants together and what sets them apart.

N. Gray Sutanto is associate professor of systematic theology at Reformed Theological Seminary in Washington, DC. He is the author of God and Humanity: Herman Bavinck and Theological Anthropology and a coauthor of Neo-Calvinism: A Theological Introduction.

Theology

‘Shrewd as Snakes’?

Chinese Christians understand Jesus’ seemingly contradictory directive.

A snake making the shape of a dove
Christianity Today January 28, 2025
Illustration by Mallory Rentsch Tlapek / Source Image: Unsplash

The Bible seems to give snakes a bad rap from the outset.

Scripture depicts the serpent as evil and deceptive, from tempting Adam and Eve to disobey God in Genesis to representing the Devil in Revelation (Rev. 12:9).

Yet at one point early in his ministry, Jesus portrays snakes in a positive light.

In Matthew 10:16, he tells his disciples: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”

Here, Jesus is sending out his disciples to proclaim the gospel. He exhorts them to travel light: to not stock up on any gold, silver, or copper or bring along extra clothing, sandals, or a staff. He encourages them to find rest in strangers’ homes and to leave a town if no one there extends welcome.

Jesus also tells the disciples to be vigilant, as persecution and suffering will arise. Yet he assures them that they will have help in the form of the Holy Spirit, who will empower them when they are arrested and give them words to respond when they face judgment before earthly governors and kings.     

In between doling out practical advice and declaring the Spirit’s ever-present nearness, Jesus issues that startling command to his disciples—and us. It’s a posture Jesus wants us to adopt in a perilous environment: that of a docile lamb surrounded by bloodthirsty beasts, displaying a crafty and cunning attitude while remaining pure and loving within.

Some may find Jesus’ saying hard to reconcile with other biblical principles, such as ridding ourselves of all malice and deceit (1 Peter 2:1). The word shrewd also carries a negative connotation, and adopting such a characteristic may sound a little reprehensible for the believer who longs to be transformed into Christlikeness rather than a cold-blooded, reptilian disposition.

In place of shrewd, some Bible translations have picked words like wary (New English Bible), cautious (Good News Translation), or wise (English Standard Version) to more accurately convey what Jesus is saying here: We are to be discerning, attuned, and responsive to what takes place around us as we endeavor to make Christ known. The Chinese Union Version may be closest to the word’s intended meaning here: It renders shrewd as ling qiao, which means “being ingenious” and “displaying finesse.”

This Lunar New Year is the Year of the Snake. According to the Chinese zodiac, those who are born in this particular year are intelligent, intuitive, and enigmatic. Chinese culture often depicts the snake as a spiritual being with hidden power, and many folk tales and legends extol the slinky reptile for its acuity and agility.

The snake’s uncanny ability to shed its skin also commonly symbolizes renewal or rebirth, and Chinese people who overcome difficult challenges often say they have shed off a skin layer.  

This is why Jesus’ statement in Matthew 10:16 may not appear as paradoxical to Chinese Christians. Instead, it is instrumental in shaping how believers in China respond to, and live under, religious oppression.

Many Christian leaders in the country leaned on this Bible verse while enduring the brutal Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976, when all churches were shut down and resistant leaders were imprisoned or sent to labor camps.

The remnant of Christians retreated underground. Sometimes they held prayer meetings and worship services in hideout tunnels, caves, or dense forests. More often, they met at homes in the night without turning the lights on.

I visited Wenzhou, the southeastern city known as China’s Jerusalem, in the early 2000s. A church elder and I climbed to the rooftop of a magnificent, newly built church, where he pointed to a hilly, tree-covered area about one or two miles away. His church met for worship services there at night during the Cultural Revolution. A watchman would stay at the foot of the hill, and when he spotted the police approaching, he would turn the flashlight on and jiggle it. The congregation would then disperse into the woods.

Churches like these survived and thrived under the religious ban. They adeptly navigated dangerous situations, never giving up on praising God and pleading with him for help in times of need. Whenever they deemed that the worst had passed, they resurfaced to evangelize relatives, friends, and acquaintances or minister to the sick and needy. Many within and outside China were surprised that the number of Protestant Christians increased threefold to fivefold in this period.

Many house church leaders have also clung to this verse in the reform era, which began in the late 1970s and lasted until 2012, when president Xi Jinping became the Chinese Communist Party’s general secretary. The government lifted the religious ban in 1979, and Ningbo Centennial Church was the first to reopen.

In 2016, Wang Yi of Chengdu’s Early Rain Covenant Church, who is currently imprisoned for his religious beliefs, preached a sermon on Matthew 10:16. In it, Wang shared the example of an elderly house church leader in Henan and how he embodied a snakelike shrewdness, or ling qiao, in spreading the Word.

This house church leader first shared the gospel in his village and established a church. When the authorities detained him for spreading Christianity and then released him, he left the village for the county town, where he continued to evangelize and establish churches. Again, the police detained and released him. He left the county town for the provincial capital to continue the Great Commission.

After getting arrested for the third time, he was not discouraged. Instead, he left the province for the capital city of Beijing, where he continued to build churches and expanded his church network in other parts of the country. I have heard similar stories many times during my field research.

Other leaders might have decided to remain in familiar places and continue their preaching in the surrounding areas. But house church leaders like this often adopted a different strategy: When the police came, they would dodge them by fleeing to other counties or provinces, which were under different police jurisdictions. Avoiding clashes with the authorities meant there was no hindrance to evangelism, and churches thrived in the “border regions” (bian qu) that intersected with two or three counties or provinces.  

Because the house church leaders kept moving from one place to another whenever opposition to the faith arose—rather than choosing to remain and causing opportunities for greater conflict—the Holy Spirit was able to work through them to allow the gospel to grow and take root in China. This is also what Jesus says to his twelve disciples as he sends them out: “When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another” (v. 23).

In many ways, the house church leaders exemplify Matthew 10:16. But they also embody another popular Chinese idiom: xu yi wei yi.

The phrase refers to yielding outwardly while remaining steadfast inwardly, and it uses the snake’s character to describe a strategy of adaptability without direct confrontation. Just as the serpent maneuvers and weaves through its environment, we can adopt an outward appearance of compliance while preserving inner principles.

This is one way Christians today are responding to suppression in China. Under religious repression, millions of believers are worshiping God clandestinely. They are accommodators who yield to the authorities outwardly while remaining steadfast in faith and evangelism.

To be clear, Matthew 10:16 is not about accommodating compromises and failures, as Wang Yi warns in his teachings. Jesus is not encouraging believers to seek personal gain or license to sin but to artfully and boldly share the Good News amid the threat of oppressive forces—a threat that may sometimes mean death.

While I was in Wenzhou, I participated in some churches’ Christmas feasts. At the time, there was no need to be wily in carrying out evangelistic efforts. Christians lived public lives. Believers and nonbelievers would mingle at large events, enjoying delicious food, singing and dancing, and hearing the story of Jesus’ birth. Many churches would also organize revival meetings between Chinese New Year’s Day and the Lantern Festival.

Nowadays, it is no longer possible for churches in Wenzhou or elsewhere in China to hold such large-scale evangelistic gatherings at Christmastime. Since 2018, through the National Committee of the Three-Self Patriotic Movement, the party-state has imposed harsh restrictions on approved churches under the clout of a Sinicization of religion policy.

The country’s revised regulations of religious affairs consider house churches illegal, and the government is actively shutting down churches, many of which have splintered into small groups to continue meeting discreetly. Dozens, if not hundreds, of house church leaders who refused to bend to the party-state have been jailed.

As we begin a new year in the Chinese calendar, Jesus’ exhortation in Matthew 10:16 is one we can contemplate and meditate on, even if we are not facing dire persecution. In what ways can we practice accommodation without compromise as we follow Jesus? How do we evangelize faithfully without inviting scrutiny from the powers that be?

While Jesus’ statement may sound contradictory, I’m reminded that wisdom, adaptability, and perseverance are essential in a world that is often hostile to our beliefs, especially for persecuted believers in China today.

Just as a snake sheds its skin to renew itself, we can continue to adapt and grow in our faith, drawing strength from the knowledge that our ultimate hope lies in Jesus’ promise that he is with us always, to the very end of the age (28:20).

Fenggang Yang is a professor of sociology and the founding director of the Center on Religion and the Global East at Purdue University. He is the author of Religion in China: Survival and Revival under Communist Rule.

Church Life

To Disciple Kids Well, Help Their Parents

Tired, lonely parents struggle with superficial family discipleship programs. But by caring for parents’ faith, the church cares for the whole family.

A vintage photo of a family leaving church together.
Christianity Today January 28, 2025
Stockbyte / Getty / Edits by CT

Parenting advice is never in short supply. 

If you’re a parent, you’ve seen all the tips, “life hacks,” and opinions perpetually flowing through social media, well-intentioned friends, and even your church community. You know the internet is full of Christian bloggers’ ideas for spiritual growth while you have a newborn, for organizing your schedule, for fun family devotions, for involving your children in cleaning the house. On Instagram in particular, you may have gotten the impression that family faith formation is predictable, even easy, for those who simply follow a good plan.

But real life doesn’t work that way. Parenting is hard and often unpredictable, and it’s further complicated by stress and our culture’s idolization of productivity and worldly success. Many parents find themselves feeling isolated, tired, and daunted by the prospect of yet another project to complete.

Discipling our children, of course, is not a project to check off our lists. But too often, the American church presents family discipleship as a matter of success, programs, and achievements. We should be introducing our particular children to a life deeply formed around the image of Christ, but instead we tend to land on one-size-fits-all programs, spiritual busywork that leads us toward works-based perfectionism or parental burnout and guilt. 

However good our intentions, this is not how a child’s faith flourishes—nor is it good for parents, whose well-being is always tied to whether our children are flourishing. How can the church better support families who want to be faithful but feel stretched thin?

The first step is to be more realistic about faith formation in the home. Overwhelmed by the demands of day-to-day life, parents often rely on their local congregations to disciple children and may ask for a program to help accomplish this task. 

Unfortunately, the kind of activities churches tend to suggest—family devotions and other activities—are frequently rote and superficial. They don’t settle deep within the person or encourage authentic relationships and genuine transformation. They don’t delve into the real and sometimes tough questions that parents and children might be wrestling with in this broken world. Unsurprisingly, then, when family life gets too hectic, these programs are some of the first commitments to be cut.

The solution is not more programs or special tips. What we need is faith enacted in our daily lives. We are formed through everyday habits and experiences. “Faith is learned as it is woven seamlessly into the fabric of daily life,” as Traci Smith writes in her book Faithful Families. Authentic Christian faith is not a program but a communal journey of being daily formed into the image of Christ.

Our children learn this kind of transformational faith from us, not a workbook. They’re watching us, observing their parents and congregations, asking questions to make meaning of how we live. They want relationships with room for honest dialogue to learn what it means to live as a follower of Jesus. A child’s faith is nurtured in the unnoticed everyday moments of life, like when a mother reminds her son of his identity in Christ, or when a father holds his daughter close for a small and desperate prayer.

There is no guarantee of success as the world understands it in spiritual development. Sometimes we will have the great joy of seeing our children learn to trust in God, but sometimes the parenting journey is wracked with grief and suffering. Rather than handing out more programs, the church should support families in every season by offering practical help, especially in stressful seasons: childcare, meal trains, and listening ears. This kind of care isn’t overtly spiritual, but it lifts weight off parents’ shoulders and leaves them with more wherewithal for discipleship in difficult seasons.

Pastors and other church leaders should also attend carefully to parents’ spiritual formation. By caring for parents’ faith, the church cares for the whole family. The “mouth speaks what the heart is full of,” as Jesus taught us (Luke 6:45), and parents whose faith is growing in depth and maturity won’t need busywork and programming to disciple their children. 

We often default to direct teaching when we think about children’s discipleship, imagining that if we have all the correct answers and tell kids exactly what to do, they’ll grow up well. But that isn’t how children learn best. They pay attention to what we say and how we handle conflict. They see where our churches invest time and money. These things are not lost on a child, and they are what teach children what is worth pursuing in life.

We will inevitably have some programs too, of course, but they should be designed to avoid spiritual busywork and foster intergenerational community. Instead of always shuttling kids off to age-segregated classes, let them forge connections with believers of various ages and life stages. Parents should not be their only models for the adult Christian life. And our programs should support weary parents and caregivers, too, with prayer, mentoring, Scripture, fellowship, and pastoral care.

Program-focused approaches to children’s discipleship may seem like the easier and more measurable option—as if we could check a box and call our discipleship work done for the day. But discipling is not a project to be efficiently completed. It is a way of life, and it is in the unprogrammed moments of daily life that churches can help families thrive.

Mimi L. Larson is the executive director for Center for Faith and Children as well as an assistant professor of educational ministries at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. She is the coeditor of Bridging Theory and Practice in Children’s Spirituality: New Directions for Education, Ministry, and Discipleship.

Ahyuwani Akanet is the managing director for Center for Faith and Children.

Lindsey Goetz is the resource director for Center for Faith and Children and author of The Gospel Story Hymnal

Books
Review

The ‘Real’ Francis of Assisi Includes the Stuff of Legend

A new biographer finds that consulting the spotty historical record only gets him so far.

Francis of Assisi with holes in his hands
Christianity Today January 28, 2025
Edits by CT / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

Late in the fourth century, a group of seven monks from a Jerusalem monastery went on a sightseeing trip to Egypt. But this was no ordinary vacation.

Traversing mountainous crags and rocky hillsides, they visited hermits, ascetics, and monastic groups. They went with the hope of seeing miraculous and abnormal occurrences, and they found even more than they were looking for. Along the way, they also evaded more than a few robbers, had some sketchy meals, and faced crocodile attacks, reminding us that road-tripping has always been an extreme sport. We know about their trip because one of them (whose name we do not know) wrote a book in Greek about the voyage after returning home. Then their abbot, one Rufinus of Aquileia, diligently translated this book into Latin, and it became a bestseller.

The hermits documented in this travelogue range from strange to stranger to really out there. They loved God deeply—no one doubts that. They were also radical misfits, decidedly incapable of living in regular society, holding down “normal” jobs, and worshiping in “normal” churches. But then, by the time Rufinus’s monks were traipsing around the Egyptian countryside to see a more feral version of themselves in the (literal) wild, radical misfits already enjoyed an established presence in the church, dating back to the locust-eating and camelhair-shirt-wearing John the Baptist.

Extraordinary believers—and our fascination with them—have always been a part of the story of Christianity. But one radical misfit in particular, Francis of Assisi, seems to loom larger—and provoke greater fascination—than any other. His life story, shrouded in legend, continues to inspire many unlikely groups, including the 1960s hippies, a group of more secular radical misfits who sometimes claimed Francis as their patron saint.

The Christian misfits did not lead comfortable lives. For this reason, among others, they tended to make others uncomfortable as well. Maybe that is part of their charisma, suggests Volker Leppin in his biography Francis of Assisi: The Life of a Restless Saint, newly translated after first being published in German.

For a historian like Leppin, a professor at Yale Divinity School, Francis is a toothsome puzzle, an enticing Rubik’s cube with no perfect solution. There are so many sources to draw from but so little certain knowledge. Questions exist even about his name. We know he was born to a wealthy merchant family in the latter decades of the 12th century. We know he turned his back on his family and started caring for the sick and the poor in his hometown and beyond. At a time and place that generally considered poor people invisible, he became famous for his poverty, even acquiring the nickname poverello (Italian for “poor man”) in his own lifetime. He was a poor celebrity—an incongruous concept, especially in the Middle Ages.

Francis wished for something akin to a monastic existence, yet he refused to join an established order. Eventually, he founded his own brotherhood of mendicant monks, who took vows of poverty and depended on charitable provisions. Although he was a natural leader, he was uncomfortable with leadership—even to the point of backing away from leading the Franciscan order he had inspired.

While marching time and again to the beat of his own drum, he managed to remain at peace with the Catholic church of his day. Over time, his order became incredibly popular. His influence on one follower, Clare of Assisi, led her to create a similar mendicant order for women. He met such prominent and powerful individuals as Pope Innocent III and Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil.

Stories like these lend themselves to factual verification. But other claims are more miraculous in character. Some sources note that he experienced stigmata—the marks of Christ’s wounds—in his own body later in life. Perhaps, living so much like Christ, he could not help taking on certain physical signifiers of saintliness.

But at this point, facts begin slipping away, and theories sneak in instead. A truly serious modern, secular historian might just get a little itchy under the collar right about now. Stigmata? Really? What are we going to talk about next? Saints who flew?

Still, the factual stuff alone already presents an impressive body of knowledge. Surely it can yield a coherent biography without compelling the biographer to sift through speculation. Not so fast, Leppin warns. These punctuated elements don’t get us to the real Francis, he argues, just as a laundry list of dates, relationships, friendships, and basic professional achievements can’t sum up the significance of any individual. People are complicated, and people in love with God are perhaps more so than most.

Why was Francis the way that he was? And was he really the way any of the sources portray him, including the most challenging and contradictory source of all—his own writings? The historical and the hagiographical mingle seamlessly, tormenting anyone who would separate fact from fiction. But then, people are never just a collection of facts. Nor are their personalities fixed through all of life.

This seems especially poignant in the case of someone like Francis, so much larger than life. Just who was he emotionally and spiritually? This question, ultimately impossible to answer adequately, fascinates and haunts Leppin in this biography. He admits that the book took shape as something other than a straightforward historical inquiry. “It is a biography,” he writes, “and yet at the same time it is a book about the difficulties of writing a biography, and specifically a biography of Francis of Assisi.”

Given the difficulties involved, why undertake such a project? Why, in other words, is it important to capture the true core, heart, and spirit of this particular man who died over a thousand years ago?

As I read through Leppin’s own elegant wrestlings, I was reminded of a much less elegant lecture I used to give on Francis and Clare when I taught an introductory world history course at a state university in the Bible Belt. The students, wide-eyed, had a hard time understanding most of these saints’ life choices. Clare’s desire for a “celestial spouse,” in particular, usually caused giggles and raised eyebrows. They wondered, Who talks about God this way?

But a commitment to serve the sick and the poor? This they could understand. Such are the saints we all still desire today—those who give their lives for others in our self-centered age. Every person wants to be seen and known more deeply, and in the story of Francis my modern students found someone who understood this and cared enough to treat others accordingly.

The age of radical misfits in the church is not over, of course. There is a reason modern saints, like Mother Teresa or Dorothy Day, still fascinate us. In their countercultural willingness to love and serve others above themselves, they offer 21st-century versions of Francis and his ilk. In the process, they remind us that self-sacrificial living is just as shocking and abnormal today as it always has been.

Here, it seems, lies the difference between Francis and the other monastics of his age: Instead of removing himself from the world into the safety of a monastery, Francis always placed himself in positions of utmost discomfort, especially of the physical sort. He understood, as Leppin writes, that “it was in vain to flee the world if there was no direction in which to flee. Of course he was profoundly shaped by the circumstances of his external life, being sent into the world to all people and to all creatures. But the power for this was rooted in his intensive relationship with God, Christ, the angels, and the saints.” We cannot, it seems, understand Francis without understanding the rich spiritual life that drove all his actions and decisions.

Leppin lays out his cards up front: Every biographer of Francis must wrestle with the hagiographical tradition alongside more typical historical facts and methods. When it comes to understanding a saint, a historian can only go so far. Even if we knew all the facts about Francis, they would not make him less complicated—perhaps only more.

This is appropriate: Studying saints has never been a strictly historical enterprise. It has always involved acknowledging the significance of the spiritual realities as they bear upon the material world. Rufinus’s pilgrim monks knew this, it seems, when they set out to investigate strange hermits and holy men. And Leppin, toward the end of this book, quietly comes to a similar conclusion, siding to some degree with the hagiographical Francis. In being open to stories and legends that can’t be verified with absolute certainty, Leppin reminds us that the church’s saints still retain a powerful grip on our hearts and minds.  

This is especially true for believers, and even for evangelicals in the post-Reformation age. Unlike Catholics, of course, evangelicals do not pray to saints, incorporate them into their worship, or involve them closely in their communal and personal spiritual lives. Still, the saints’ love for God intrigues evangelicals too, and their disruptive behavior can still achieve that most revolutionary disruption of all: bringing sinners to know God.

As Leppin notes of his subject, “In the distance we meet a man who was seeking but never found his purpose in life fulfilled. And a man who simply will not let us grasp him either.” But somehow Francis has pointed so many others to God over the past millennium, and that is what true sainthood is really about.

Nadya Williams is the author of Cultural Christians in the Early Church and Mothers, Children, and the Body Politic: Ancient Christianity and the Recovery of Human Dignity.

addApple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseellipseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squarefolderGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastprintremoveRSSRSSSaveSavesaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube