News

Kenyan Pastors Are Praying for Haiti. They’re Also Shaping the Police Mission to Save It.

President William Ruto commissioned church leaders to meet with Haitian law enforcement, military representatives, and a gang leader to discuss Kenya’s security mission.

Kenya's first lady, Rachel Ruto, center, participates in a national prayer gathering for Haiti and other countries in downtown Nairobi on April 15.

Kenya's first lady, Rachel Ruto, center, participates in a national prayer gathering for Haiti and other countries in downtown Nairobi on April 15.

Christianity Today April 19, 2024
Courtesy Office of the First Lady of Kenya

Kenya’s leaders aren’t saying much publicly about the security force they plan to send to gang-embattled Haiti. But they’re talking a whole lot with God.

Last month, as armed groups escalated their insurgency in Port-au-Prince and plunged Haiti deeper into a historic humanitarian crisis, pastors advising Kenya’s government met for three days at a hotel in Nairobi to pray.

In a sky-blue conference room at the Weston Hotel, three Kenyan pastors joined Haitian and American ministry leaders and Kenya’s first lady, Rachel Ruto, to plead for divine assistance for the beleaguered Caribbean country. They prayed for the 2,500-person multinational police force Kenya has volunteered to lead to help Haitian law enforcement. At one point, meeting participants told CT, group members wept.

After two days of prayer, the first lady dropped in on an album release party in another part of the Weston, which President William Ruto owns, and announced her office had formed a prayer committee for Haiti. “We cannot allow our police to go to Haiti without prayer,” Rachel Ruto told fans of the Kenyan gospel group 1005 Songs & More.

Kenya agreed last October to spearhead a UN-authorized international security mission to Haiti, but the deployment has faced various delays, including legal challenges and questions about funding.

The prayer marathon was part of a broader effort by the Ruto administration to strategize “a spiritual solution for our police and people of Haiti,” according to the first lady. The initiative, coordinated by the administration’s “faith diplomacy” office, has so far included a national prayer gathering, a 40-day prayer guide for Haiti, and an official fact-finding trip to the United States.

For a government that has been largely tight-lipped about the police mission, the church outreach programs represent one of the most visible ways the administration has engaged the public about the plan. The Rutos, who are outspoken about their evangelical faith, took office in 2022 thanks to what many of the country’s Christians say was divine protection during a disputed election.

“Let us thank the Lord who gave our president such a burden to think about Haiti,” Julius Suubi, a pastor and spiritual advisor to the Rutos, told a crowd of roughly 1,000 pastors at an April 15 prayer service in downtown Nairobi. “Which president in Africa ever thinks about a country outside Africa?”

Earlier this month, the same group of pastors and the first lady’s staff traveled to the United States to meet with church and business leaders, US and Haitian officials, and representatives from law enforcement and the military. They also participated in a Zoom meeting with gang coalition leader Jimmy “Barbeque” Chérizier, according to Serge Musasilwa, a member of the delegation.

Musasilwa, the country director for a ministry in central Kenya called Segera Mission, said the group wanted to hear from people across all sectors of Haitian society, to better understand the challenges Kenya’s police would face. President Ruto commissioned the team to provide context to inform law enforcement and to increase the security mission’s odds of success, he said. The pastors wanted to know what civil society groups and churches say the problems are; they asked about solutions; they inquired about how well trained the gangs are and what motivates them.

The group is scheduled to present its findings to the president this month, in advance of a presidential trip to the United States in May that will include the first state visit by an African president to the White House in 16 years. Ruto, who says his country has a moral obligation to help Haiti, has insisted the security mission is moving forward—despite delays in funding the Biden administration has pledged to underwrite it ($40 million are currently being held up by Republicans in the US Congress).

Musasilwa is optimistic. “It’s going to be a new beginning for the country,” he told CT. But he says the president is eager to avoid mistakes that have plagued previous interventions in Haiti. “If you are guided only by the emotion, or by desperation, the risk is very high that you’ll find yourself on the list of those who failed.”

Part of the fact-finding trip was simply about identifying who is functioning as Haiti’s government. Haiti does not have a single elected official currently in office; the country has named a transitional council that is supposed to appoint a prime minister and prepare for eventual elections, but the council has not yet been sworn in.

For instance, Musasilwa said, he met for six hours with Haiti’s ambassador to Qatar, Francois Guillaume, trying to understand Haiti’s government structure.

“Assume that our forces are in Port-au-Prince today and they arrest one of the gangs,” Musasilwa said. “They would take him where? There is no judiciary.”

The multinational security mission, which many observers had hoped would deploy months ago, has been delayed in part by uncertainty over who exactly Kenyans would be working with. Haiti’s outgoing prime minister, Ariel Henry, signed partnership agreements with Kenya on March 1, shortly before gang attacks closed Haiti’s main international airport and stranded him outside the country.

“As much as we want our troops to come tomorrow, first of all, there’s no government in Haiti, so no order,” said Davis Kisotu, a pastor at an independent Pentecostal church who is close to the Rutos.

Kisotu, like the other Kenyan ministry leaders who traveled in the delegation, serves on the National Prayer Altar, a team in the first lady’s office that oversees church services at the presidential residence and works with pastors across Kenya to pray for government. They are not the only government team making preparations for the mission; Haitian officials have visited Nairobi, and Kenyan law enforcement have met with their Haitian counterparts in Port-au-Prince.

But while bureaucrats in New York and Washington iron out the operational details for the police mission, one of the Prayer Altar team’s jobs is also “to mobilize prayer and the men of God—Haitian pastors, US pastors and Kenya pastors and prayer warriors across the nations.”

To that end, pastors from across the country gathered Monday at the Kenyatta International Convention Centre, a facility nestled beside Kenya’s parliament and supreme court in the heart of Nairobi. The first lady addressed an energetic and supportive crowd as it waved flags and prayed for Kenya, for Israel, and for Haiti.

Other speakers, veering at times into tones fit for a campaign rally, prayed for peace in Haiti and praised President Ruto for his commitment to use Kenyan power as a force for international peace. Asunta Juma, host of Tracing the Mantles, a popular evangelical talk show, declared that Ruto has found favor with many world leaders because God’s favor is upon him. “We elected a leader who is going to provide leadership to the nations of the world,” she said.

The national gathering came at a time when other international church groups are in the midst of their own pushes for concerted prayer for Haiti. Across the United States, mission groups have been emailing and texting supporters with regular prayer requests. Baptist Haiti Mission, whose leadership has consulted with the Ruto administration, wants to draw a million prayer partners into its prayer campaign, which includes weekly livestreams.

In Kenya, the first lady’s faith diplomacy office has so far recruited at least 200 pastors to lead their churches through 40 days of prayer for Haiti, using a prayer guide produced by the National Altar. A copy of the 132-page guide, provided to CT, includes sweeping prayers for healing from the trauma of slavery, for deliverance from the “generational bondage and powers” of witchcraft, for the healing of deforested land, and for God to “flush out gangs and insurgents from their hiding places and deliver them into the hands of the police.”

“There’s something about Haiti that has captured the men and women of God in Kenya,” Suubi, the National Altar member who also leads Highway of Holiness Ministries, told CT.

Not every Christian leader is enamored.

Many Kenyans, including mainline Christians and some evangelicals, oppose their country’s involvement in Haiti. Lawmakers sued to stop it, leading to an injunction by Kenya’s highest court that the administration has tried to work around.

While Kenya’s last two presidents were Roman Catholics, Ruto rose to power with significant help from the country’s charismatic and Pentecostal church communities, many of whom view any criticism of Ruto as spiritual attack.

Sammy Wainaina, former provost of All Saints Cathedral in Nairobi and one of Kenya’s most prominent Anglicans, says the Kenya police are not equipped to deal with the political situation in Haiti.

“Kenya is currently facing a big shortage of police force,” Wainaina said. “Countries like the US should address the problems they have created in Haiti.”

Enoch Opuka, a lecturer on development studies at Africa International University who also happens to have taught Ruto in high school, thinks Haiti’s grinding poverty must be addressed before any other solution can work. Deploy massive amounts of aid, cancel all of Haiti’s debts, and facilitate dialogue between armed groups and government, he said; don’t deploy police.

“You don’t remove hunger by sending soldiers,” Opuka said.

Musasilwa is aware of the criticisms, which is why he says the fact-finding team has focused on listening to people across Haitian society and studying the failures of previous interventions in Haiti.

Among the recommendations in his report, for instance, will be that Kenya help Haiti facilitate a peace and reconciliation conference to bring as many Haitians as possible into conversations about its future—including gangs.

“We are not there to resolve their problems,” Musasilwa said. “We are there to support them in the solutions that fit for them.”

He said he has learned something for certain in his many conversations and his research into what has not worked in Haiti:

“If Kenya wants to succeed in this mission, there is only one key: It’s not to be perceived in one way or another that they are implementing US politics,” Musasilwa said. “That is something to pray for.”

With reporting from Moses Wasamu in Nairobi.

Andy Olsen is senior editor at CT.

Theology

‘Bluey’: A Heavenly Vision of Life Together

The popular kids series reminds parents that playfulness is next to godliness.

Dad and Bingo run around and have fun with Turtleboy in the TV series, Bluey.

Dad and Bingo run around and have fun with Turtleboy in the TV series, Bluey.

Christianity Today April 19, 2024
© Disney, All Rights Reserved

When my oldest daughter, Elaine, was four, I watched her chase a soap bubble around the yard, utterly spellbound, and it struck me as a tiny window into how God must have felt as he watched Adam and Eve encounter each of the animals in Eden. Likewise, when I discovered that my youngest, Olivia, had held a full conversation with me while cutting our kitten’s whiskers under the table, I felt attuned with God’s anger when he flung his judgments at Israel through the prophets.

These kinds of moments, and a thousand others, make raising kids and building a family spiritually illuminating tasks—especially when they ask theologically stimulating questions like “Does Jesus wear undies?” And although the creators of Bluey, an Emmy-awarded animated kids series, seem to have no overtly religious leanings, the show unexpectedly taps into unseen realities.

If you haven’t yet discovered Bluey, let me catch you up. The series, streaming on Disney+, centers around a family of Australian blue heelers: six-year-old Bluey, her younger sister Bingo, Mum (Chilli), and Dad (Bandit). Each episode is less than 10 minutes long and targets a preschool audience—but the popular show draws all ages, and, in 2023, was the second-most acquired streaming program with 43.9 billion minutes consumed.

When the producers announced that a longer episode was slated for season 3, the public grew panicked that the show may be ending (thankfully, it’s not!), revealing just how deeply the series meets a need in our culture—and I think it’s worth exploring why.

The Heelers are just your average Australian family, with no superpowers or high-stakes problems to solve. But through their togetherness, these four transform the ordinary moments of family life into something more. In particular, Bandit and Chilli’s commitment to playing with their kids both inspires and indicts the merely human parents watching—and sometimes even brings us to tears.

But more than that, it’s my belief that Bluey delights and dismays us this way because it’s eschatological, pointing to the type of creative togetherness we’ll all experience one day in the new creation.

Before having kids, I scoured parenting books for effective methodologies; but 11 years in, I often find myself tactically bankrupt. I mean, how exactly do you handle one child’s jealousy that the other child is sick and gets to stay home from school? But the great thing about Bluey is that it acknowledges and solves these kinds of challenges—not through a didactic blueprint but through, of all things, improvisational and imaginative play.

Throughout the show, Bandit and Chilli wholeheartedly enter Bluey and Bingo’s worlds. They join in their children’s games and follow their zany rules assiduously—whether it be freezing when a chord on the “magic” xylophone is struck, diving to save the balloon from falling during “Keepy Uppy,” or acting like robots or sick patients—anything to inhabit the on-the-ground domain where their kids’ ethical and spiritual development is daily being formed.

Unintentional though it may be, the Heelers’ parental play takes seriously Jesus’ words, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these” (Matt. 19:14), and even models Christ’s self-effacing humility in meeting us on our level. In both narratives—biblical and animated—the little ones’ stinginess, laziness, fearfulness, cheating, and lots of other juvenile behaviors can be redeemed and transformed.

Take Peter. As Erin Dufault-Hunter, associate professor of Christian ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary and an acquaintance of mine, pointed out to me one day, “After his resurrection, Jesus repeatedly asks Peter, ‘Do you love me?’ (John 21:15–17). It’s a game with words, one that recalls Peter’s braggadocio and betrayal and eventually turns him into a tender shepherd of the church.”

Even though Bandit and Chilli sometimes ask very relatable questions—like “Can’t we play a game where I lie down?”—their near-constant willingness to indulge in their kids’ whimsical antics can also cause many parents to feel inadequate. In a recent podcast about the show, NPR host Stephen Thompson described binge-watching Bluey right after he’d launched his son on his college career. “I don’t think that was good for my emotional health,” he said, presumably because it made him doubt the quality of his parenting when it was already too late.

I, for one, resonate with these insecurities. Truth be told, I’m terrible at playing with my kids like Bandit and Chilli. I’m reminded of myself in a second-season episode called “Let’s Play Octopus.” Bluey has her dalmatian friend Chloe over, and Bandit pretends he’s an octopus capturing the girls as they attempt to steal his treasure. Afterward, when Chloe goes home, she tries to replicate the experience with her own dad—who is, shall we say, a bit too stiff and hyper-rational to pull it off. Exasperated, Chloe exclaims, “You’re not playing it properly,” to which the confused dad replies, “But this is how I play it.” Cross-armed, Chloe quips back, “Bluey’s dad is more fun than you.”

I’m that parent. And I think I’m an unnatural player because, for much of my life, I’ve been focused on being productive—thanks, in part, to the ever-industrious Protestant work ethic. As a working mother, I seek to maximize my day, grasping and collecting each scrap of time like a scarce resource that I can put toward “useful” ends. But beyond my idolatry of efficiency, I’ve struggled with an anemic theology of play. After all, what possible role can childlike play perform that adult-like purposefulness can’t? In short: a big role.

Studies show unstructured play can greatly benefit our kids—nearly half of whom are suffering from a growing mental health crisis. As Courtney Ellis, author of Happy Now: Let Playfulness Lift Your Load and Renew Your Spirit, points out in a piece for CT, “Playfulness is essential to human flourishing” and can be defined as “anything that brings us joy and connection.” This means the benefits of play also extend to enrich the congregational life of the local church family—and our walk of faith.

In his book, Far Too Easily Pleased, Jesuit scholar James V. Schall reminds us that “leisure describes the life of God.” God created the universe not because he felt compelled to or because he lacked something. And as the triune God, the Father created the world together with the Spirit and the Son (Col. 1:15–17)—whipping up magma, mountains, and mammals out of sheer freedom and love. God created the entire inhabited world, in part, for us to rejoice in it and praise him for it (Prov. 8:31).

As Thomas Aquinas said, “God plays. God creates playing. And man should play if he is to live as humanly as possible and to know reality, since it is created by God’s playfulness.”

Joyful play is an indispensable ingredient in making us fully human in his image—which means God can and does use play for our sanctification. Our whole purpose as creatures is, as the Westminster Catechism so aptly summarizes, “To glorify God and enjoy Him forever” (emphasis mine). And if God created play, and all that God created will one day be renewed in the new creation, then we can expect that this kind of uninhibited play awaits us in heaven.

As Felipe do Vale says in another piece for CT, “The resurrection is not a cosmic Etch A Sketch, where God shakes everything to start over; it is a divine commitment to what has already been made and declared very good (Gen. 1:31).” The same God who created the frolicking chimpanzees at the zoo blesses the young children who quite literally ape them. This means our best play times are yet to come—and our earthly glimpses of play speak to an eternity of joy. And while we cannot yet imagine it, I have a feeling the experience will be infinitely better than “Keepy Uppy.”

I know I’ll never parent as well as the fictional Heelers do (although my shining moments might just add up to the length of one Bluey episode)—and my kids probably won’t resolve conflict as effortlessly as Bluey and Bingo seem to (which is why I’m investing in a college fund and a therapy fund for each of the girls).

Still, on a practical level, Bluey challenges me to make room for more spontaneity and creative collaboration with my daughters each day. And as I do, I remember that the utopia it depicts is coming soon: a perfected humanity enjoying complete and creative togetherness for all eternity—along with our self-giving, playful Creator.

Katherine Lee is a poet and a mom working on a memoir about the ways her motherhood has been defined by the women in her family. Her master’s in theology has informed these pursuits in surprising ways.

Books
Review

You Can’t Reach People for Christ While Holding Their Culture at Arm’s Length

A veteran missiologist shares a lifetime of lessons on bringing the gospel into unfamiliar settings.

Christianity Today April 19, 2024

In an important new book, missiologist Darrell Whiteman tells a revealing story about a missionary who had been preaching in a particular community. Without realizing it, the missionary gave offense by wearing expensive shoes in a place where people couldn’t afford shoes of any type. For Whiteman, this anecdote illustrates how much missionaries need to learn—and how many presumptions they might need to abandon—in order to bring the gospel to people in other cultures.

Crossing Cultures with the Gospel: Anthropological Wisdom for Effective Christian Witness

Whiteman’s book Crossing Cultures with the Gospel: Anthropological Wisdom for Effective Christian Witness, challenges his readers—and missionaries in particular—to recognize the possible ethnocentrism in their perspective, which can distort and impede their ability to communicate well across cultural boundaries. As he explains, each culture has its own ways of understanding and coping with the problems of life. All of us understand biblical truths in ways that seem natural to us in our own cultures but not to people who have grown up in other cultures.

In each community, traditions of communication and interaction develop over time, resulting in distinct customs. Every community has its own sense of the past, its own traditions of loyalty and obligation, its own rules of courtesy, and its own conceptions of virtue and honor. If missionaries are to communicate with people who have grown up in other cultures, argues Whiteman, they must lay aside their own presuppositions and cultural conventions and commit to acquiring knowledge of unfamiliar customs and ways of thought.

Watching, listening, and asking questions

The missionary project, as Whiteman reminds us, is to insert the universal message of the gospel “within the very heart of a culture.” As he observes, “Unless the gospel connects deeply with the culture of the people, there will be very little transformation.”

Furthermore, if the gospel makes no sense within a particular community, the people might well distort it to fit their own presuppositions. Whiteman recalls a community in Madang Province of Papua New Guinea, whose members heard the gospel from missionaries and turned it into the claim that after being baptized, blessed by a pastor, and living good lives, their spirits would leave their bodies and go up to heaven three days after dying. Even leaving aside such extreme misinterpretations, it’s likely that a poorly understood message will be regarded as irrelevant, boring, or unimportant. Unfortunately, says Whiteman, “seldom is [the gospel] heard and seen as good news.”

It was firsthand experience that brought Whiteman to the conviction that missionaries need better instruction on communicating within other cultures. After living for two years with missionaries in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, he realized that they had little awareness of how the gospel was reaching the local community. It seemed evident to him that preparation for missionary service ought to include training in cross-cultural communication.

Some people, he notes, spend years taking courses in Bible and theology, but these studies leave them only partially equipped to transmit the gospel to another people. They learn how to interpret biblical passages, but they are unprepared to interpret the situations they will encounter in a strange community.

Before going with his wife to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea, Whiteman completed a PhD in anthropology. After serving abroad several years, he joined the faculty of Asbury Theological Seminary, eventually becoming dean of its E. Stanley Jones School of World Mission and Ministry, where he served for 21 years. Along with his seminary duties, Whiteman worked with many organizations to help aspiring missionaries learn to communicate to people in other cultures. He has traveled broadly, visiting as many as 78 countries to teach missionaries and churches about delivering the gospel across cultural boundaries.

Anyone who wants to do this well, Whiteman says, should be aware of the messages we inevitably convey even without uttering a word. As he writes, “The lions’ share of evangelism is what is spoken nonverbally. The tone of our voice, our lifestyle and our behavior are all communicating volumes of information.” Indeed, what local people see and hear in the behavior of visitors can influence whether they will want to know them or learn from them.

How, then, is the deeply felt sense of God’s love to be brought across the boundary between missionaries and the people they wish to reach? Whiteman recommends a practical method that involves watching, listening, and asking questions.

As an example, he describes one way he came to know some of the beliefs about spirits held by people in his Solomon Islands community. A friend had stopped by for a visit, and after staying a while, he said as he left, “I think it’s safe for me to go home now.” Asked why, the friend explained that he had come from the bush, where malign spirits had attached to him. He had stopped by to allow the spirits to dissipate before going home, where he had a newborn child he wanted to protect from their attacks.

Fundamentally, the cross-cultural project requires following the example of Christ, who allowed himself, as he took on human flesh, to acquire the cultural conventions of a first-century Jewish community. “The Incarnation,” writes Whiteman, “is more than an important theological doctrine about God becoming a human being. It is also a model for cross-cultural ministry. Being incarnational means we empty ourselves of our pride, prejudices, personal agendas, ambitions and lifestyle in order to enter deeply into the world of another culture. Incarnation frequently means downward mobility.”

Some missionaries, Whiteman regrets, never make that transition. He points to a missionary who disliked the food of the people he was supposed to reach, which gave him little chance of being effective. Missionaries can unknowingly offend their host communities by violating their conceptions of correct behavior. For instance, one missionary offended his neighbors by talking to his dog. They believed that humans only talk to other humans, and they wondered what kind of relationship this man had with the dog.

A second conversion

In fact, argues Whiteman, the commitment to incarnational outreach requires a “second conversion.” Beyond their conversion to Christ, missionaries need to experience a “cleansing of unnecessary assumptions about the gospel and the way that it is to be communicated.”

That takes work and time. Whiteman relates the story of one missionary who lived in a Bangladesh community for 18 years before feeling like he understood it well enough to make the gospel appealing to its people.

Whiteman explains the ideal of a “second conversion” like this:

We take our understanding of the gospel, as culturally conditioned as it is, and we develop a relationship with people who are different from us in their culture. We attempt to read the Bible through their eyes and to understand and interpret it from the perspective of their worldview, not our worldview. When this begins to happen, there will no longer be just a one-way arrow pointing from the missionary communicator to the non-Christian receptor. Now arrows will go both directions because the missionary will learn many new things about God when they view life through the lens of their host culture.

Essential to the second conversion, says Whiteman, is humility. Missionaries can come to appreciate the experience and perspective of others by entering into dialogue with them. As they develop friendships, they can become conversant with new ways of thinking and, notably, discover how other people see God in their worlds. As Paul declared, God has not left himself without witness in any society (Acts 14:17).

Whiteman describes the career of a German missionary who saw “the image of God in the Tamil people” of southern India and sought “to lead them to a fuller knowledge of God as revealed in Jesus.” The way that an imprint of God already exists among a people can be a starting point for explaining the gospel. Paul, in his speech on Mars Hill, presented Christ as the unknown God that the Athenians had already been worshipping (Acts 17:22–31).

The book also mentions a missionary in Nigeria who learned an important lesson from a local elder on how his service was perceived. When the missionary exulted in having been sent to these people by God, the elder responded, “We are glad you have come, but it is our Igbo god Chukwu who sent you to us so we could learn more about God, now that you have told us about Jesus.” Whiteman writes that God already has a witness in every culture “at every period of human history.” This makes the missionary project exciting and encouraging; as we see how the gospel becomes meaningful to another people, we “learn more about what God is doing in the world.”

Whiteman stresses that, in the end, the fundamental means of crossing boundaries is friendship. Miscommunication is inevitable when people come together from different cultures, but as Peter says, “love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Pet. 4:8). Miscues, blunders, and misunderstandings need not derail a relationship if people like each other and enjoy each other’s company. There is no substitute, concludes Whiteman, for kindness, respect, and love—qualities of the Savior who commissioned the missionary enterprise.

Robert Canfield is an emeritus professor of anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis.

Culture

The Best Christian Kids TV Shows, Not Tells

Series like The Wingfeather Saga bring children along for the adventure of following Jesus.

Christianity Today April 19, 2024
Image Source / Getty

I picked up the first book reluctantly. Was I really going to spend my children’s nap time reading children’s fiction? But The Wingfeather Saga had been recommended to me by so many fans that I eventually joined the throngs of Christian adults and kids who’ve enjoyed the series.

From the start, author Andrew Peterson captivated my imagination, building a world I could recognize while pushing the limits of familiarity. Aerwier has a bookshop with a nerdy owner; the three Igby siblings enjoy exploring its packed shelves. So normal! But just across the street is a city prison run by lizard monsters called Fangs. Not so normal.

The Wingfeather books have since been adapted into an animated series; the second season premiered at the beginning of this month, with new episodes released weekly. I remember the Christian animations from my childhood—Bibleman, Psalty the Singing Songbook, and VeggieTales —as either simplistic retellings of Bible stories or moralizing lessons. These shows did a fine job of teaching me what God expected. But they didn’t captivate me with the idea of following Jesus.

The animated Wingfeather, by contrast, is lighthearted and sincere, witty without resorting to gimmicks. It cultivates endearing characters without creating familiar Christian caricatures.

What makes a good Christian children’s show? Here are four things The Wingfeather Saga does well that I hope would be true of any Christian program that I watch with my kids.

The show invites kids along for the adventure.

One of the quickest ways to bore kids is to talk at them. Shows that offer not much more than monologues, telling children what they should think and do, will rarely capture their hearts.

This principle of active participation applies across our discipleship efforts. We find that when kids are invited into the life of the church—praying, reading, and serving—Sunday worship becomes more than rote attendance. When they’re invited into daily rhythms of confession, apologizing, and asking for forgiveness (and when it’s not only asked of them, but expressed to them by an adult who is in the wrong), they grow to see sin and reconciliation differently.

By inviting kids into the life of faith—by taking them along with us, rather than just telling them what to do or think—we are much more likely to capture their hearts, rather than to just dictate their behavior.

Season 2 of The Wingfeather Saga does an incredible job (even better than season 1) of inviting kids to come along for the ride as characters explore, face challenges, and learn lessons. As the adventure unfolds, kids are invited to use their imaginations. They’ll watch wide-eyed as the Igby children encounter a massive sea monster who’s seemingly called out of the deep by the youngest’s singing; they’ll shudder as they’re chased up trees by toothy cows that live in the darkness of the woods. They’ll enter a world of creative play, even as they learn eternal truths about the world, themselves, and God.

The show draws a clear distinction between good and evil.

The Wingfeather Saga has good characters who live honorably and bad characters who prize selfish gain. Evil is represented physically; the oppressive Fangs drip with venom. They delight in taking the lives and livelihoods of innocent Glipwood residents, bringing to mind the one who comes to “steal and kill and destroy” (John 10:10).

At the same time, those who seek to live for the larger kingdom—like the Igby grandfather who’s never forgotten all that the Fangs took from his family—are well-worn and well-traveled, with clear eyes and weathered hands. These characters either recall or learn the freedom that is possible, inching their way toward it even as they work their gardens day after day.

By making good and evil obvious, young viewers are more easily able to conceptualize the two kingdoms at war in Wingfeather, and to connect the lives of the characters they wish to emulate with their own daily experiences. The Igby children rebel against injustice, loyally fight to protect each other, and maintain the good name of their family—worthy virtues for young and old alike.

“Good” doesn’t necessarily mean “tough” or “popular.” The Wingfeather Saga helps kids understand that some of the most courageous characters aren’t the most physically capable, like little sister Leeli, whose mangled leg causes her to limp. Peet the Sock Man’s off-putting personality has estranged him from society; but his valiant efforts to protect and aid the Igby children reveal that he’s merely misunderstood.

The show acknowledges the complexity of the human heart.

Even as we want our kids to understand the world’s moral order, we also want to acknowledge the complexity of the human heart. We all struggle with longings for approval, comfort, and ease, even at the cost of our dignity or another’s well-being. And yet all of us, no matter our failings, can also be redeemed.

In Wingfeather season 2, townspeople grapple with their own self-seeking tendencies; they’re faced with difficult choices between doing what is right, and doing what feels good in the moment. They learn that sometimes leaders are afraid, and that showing bravery in one moment is not a guarantee of bravery in the next.

By resisting oversimplification, we help children understand the temptations they themselves are likely to face—sometimes unsuccessfully. Will they speak out when someone is being treated unfairly, even if it might turn them into the target? Will they risk their own comfort to protect someone they love? Will they welcome those others exclude, willing to be associated with the lowly and outcast? No matter how often they miss the opportunity God has given them, his grace abounds.

The show introduces new questions, even as it answers others.

One of the greatest strengths of The Wingfeather Saga is its ability to lay some essential groundwork about God and human nature while introducing other questions for kids to explore.

Season 2 may leave its young viewers with a sense of confidence in their ability to identify evil. But it may also leave them uneasy about the darkness that hides in all of our hearts. The show might demonstrate that living with integrity often comes with a reward in the end. But is integrity “worthwhile” when the payoff doesn’t seem obvious or inevitable?

One key way that kids grow in their faith is by asking some of these more complicated questions. In the same way that we don’t want to talk at children about who God is, we also don’t want to answer all the questions for them at once. Of course, as parents, caregivers, teachers, or other important adults in their lives, we want to be a source of confident reassurance. But we also want to empower and equip them to do some wondering on their own, without too quickly offering solutions.

Many Christians are understandably hesitant about television as a discipleship tool, and I get it. With two little ones in my care, we intentionally limit screen time and more often than not opt for books over TV.

But there is something powerful that happens when adults and children sit down to enjoy a show together; and that would be my encouragement for those thinking about queuing up Wingfeather or other Christian programming. Follow up your viewing with discussion; listen to the scenes and details that resonated with your kids, and share your favorite parts, too. Formation can happen anywhere—even on the couch.

Amy Gannett is a writer and Bible teacher passionate about equipping Christians to study the Bible through The Bible Study Schoolhouse. She is also the founder of Tiny Theologians, a line of discipleship tools for children.

Theology

Filipinos and Americans Diverge on Trusting Pastors

Studies find that while less than a third of Americans trust church leaders, 90 percent of Filipinos do.

Christianity Today April 19, 2024
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: Getty / Lightstock

While less than a third of Americans rate clergy as highly honest and ethical, across the globe in the Philippines, 91 percent of the public trusts religious leaders, according to EON Group’s 2021 Philippine Trust Index. Respondents of the survey ranked pastors as the most trusted leaders in Filipino society, compared to a Gallup poll that found clergy in the US ranked lower than 10 other professions, including chiropractors and police officers.

“When people outside of church find out I’m a pastor, their demeanor changes out of respect,” said Aldrin Peñamora, director of the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches’ Justice, Peace, and Reconciliation Commission. Some people even ask him for prayer.

The disconnect is rooted in cultural differences, religion’s role in society, as well as the impact of church scandals. Still, pastors from both countries noted the importance of having pastors engage with their congregations and local communities to build trust.

Drivers of trust in the Filipino church

In the Philippines, Catholics make up 80 percent of the population, while evangelicals make up about 3 percent. Catholicism came to the Philippines through Spanish colonialism and stuck as Filipinos made their faith their own. Today, the Catholic faith has become a cultural attribute of Filipino life.

The high view of church leaders also reflects traditional Filipino values, said Peñamora: “Filipino culture values respecting the elderly, which spills over to their submission to people in authority, including religious authority.”

In the Philippines, older people are considered wise, and they provide a sense of order and direction to the life of the community, Peñamora said. The root of this respect is utang na loob, defined as “the sense of obligation to return a favor to someone.” Because the older generation paved the way for next generations to enjoy certain privileges, younger people feel indebted and want to give back to their elders. Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Anna Cristina Tuazon writes that utang na loob isn’t a transactional relationship but an acknowledgement of a malasakit, “an act of compassionate sacrifice that goes above what is expected.” The debt is never fully repaid.

According to the EON survey, the number one driver of trust in the Filipino church is when it “has integrity and espouses honesty, providing a full accounting of its funds and other resources.” Other drivers include having a wide reach (including global connections), and maintaining a separation of church and state. Despite recent scandals in Filipino Protestant and Catholic churches, Filipinos of all ages still trust the church: 85 percent of Gen Z responders said they trust the church, as well as 89 percent of millennials, 95 percent of Gen Xers, and 97 percent of baby boomers.

As a result, Peñamora said that many congregants are eager to emulate what ministers are doing, including evangelizing and serving in church ministries.

Francis Egenias, the chairman of the board of the Philippine Missionary Institute, said that most congregants trust religious leaders to guide them in matters of faith. “Filipinos listen to their leaders out of respect, even when they don’t like what is being said to them,” Egenias said. Yet that doesn’t mean that people are heeding their words, as “sermons enter one ear and exit the other.”

For instance, even though the church speaks out on practices like vote buying—where candidates give money to people in exchange for their votes—or playing the illegal gambling game jueteng, Christians continue to do these things, Egenias said.

“Filipinos do both the profane and the sacred,” Egenias said. “They go to church even when they don’t obey. They listen to their pastors as long as they don’t interfere with their vices.”

Filipino Americans caught between two worlds

This high trust is also seen in Filipino American communities, three-quarters of whom identify as Christian, mostly Catholic. Father Perry Leiker of Los Angeles’s St. Bernard Catholic Church noted to the Los Angeles Times that nearly half of the church’s parishioners are Filipino American. “They’re just very expressive of their faith and very proud of their faith, and I think they find a lot of support in their faith,” he said.

However, that trust can easily be broken in both Catholic and evangelical churches. Gabriel Catanus, lead pastor of Garden City Covenant Church in Chicago, has observed that Filipino Americans raised in white evangelical megachurches often become disillusioned by organized religion because of the hurt and spiritual abuse they experience.

“[Filipino Americans] are treated like the help in churches, seminaries, and Christian colleges but do not have a voice in leadership,” Catanus said. He finds that people with marginalized identities suffer most from the worst parts of institutional life.

In response, he builds trust with his multiethnic congregation by allowing Filipino Americans to receive and build community without the expectation to serve. He is also intentional about educating them on the historic and systemic realities upon which institutions are built and inviting them to consistently follow the person of Jesus.

Filipinos’ trust in the church, whether they are in the homeland or in the diaspora, is shaped heavily by their experience with the church leaders, Catanus said. They long for a shepherding presence whom they can confide in during times of hardship and strife.

“We need to have leaders who listen to God and to people and who are willing to listen to people who suffer,” Catanus said. “When you do that, you cannot rush.”

Breakdown in institutional trust

For the larger American population, the distrust of pastors is representative of the country’s own values and culture.

“The decline in trust in religious institutions is a part of the larger decline in trust in all institutions,” said Daniel Hummel, research fellow in the history department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “Americans are highly individualistic in how they understand the world, and this bleeds into the role of the church.”

Instead of being a mediator, the church becomes a place where one goes to meet one’s needs, Hummel said. This cultural reality makes it harder for trust in institutions to be sustained because it is easy to opt out of a fellowship when it no longer serves one’s needs.

Also, church attendance today remains lower than pre-pandemic levels, making it more difficult for church leaders to build personal relationships with their congregants. As a result, there are fewer points of contact between clergy and those outside the church.

In CT’s January article on why Americans no longer trust pastors, Nathan Finn, executive director of the Institute for Transformational Leadership at North Greenville University, pointed to several factors for this change: clergy sex abuse, political polarization, and evangelicals’ countercultural moral positions. Finn said this decline in trust is notable “especially among those who have either had bad church experiences or whose worldview assumptions are already at odds with historic Christian beliefs.”

In the Black church, some see a failure of leadership as clergy stay silent amid injustice.

“Black churches turn the other cheek to issues that plague our world,” said Taylon Lancaster, senior pastor at Third Baptist Church in Springfield, Massachusetts. “Black clergy are silent on the issues that Christians should’ve cried out loud about.”

Building trust is needed in both contexts

Despite the differences in how pastors are viewed in the two countries, leaders from both stressed the importance of building up the credibility of churches in their context to witness to the gospel.

In the US, Lancaster believes the church can build trust by caring about the issues that communities are facing and acting as a transformative presence that holistically meets people’s needs. This requires religious leaders to create space for people to share their concerns.

Sandra Maria Van Opstal, cofounder and executive director of Chasing Justice, noted that, to build trust, “churches must be honest, repent, and confess when they’ve done something wrong, even when it’s hard to do as an institution.”

She has observed that in communities of color, it can be difficult for Christians to walk away from their congregation because many of their relationships are wrapped up in the structures of the church. “The church is integral to the flourishing of marginalized people,” she said.

The church is where people in her community find food and financial support, and where they connect with people from similar ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. This is why Van Opstal finds it necessary for churches to be intentional in creating an environment where trust can grow. Although Filipinos have high trust in their church leaders, evangelical churches still have to intentionally build relationships within their communities.

Over in Quezon City, Philippines, Chonabelle Domingo, executive director of Mission Ministries Philippines (MMP), believes “the evangelical should be creative in doing outreach.” Her ministry builds trust within her community by offering early childhood education to low-income families. The ministry started after she saw that she was more welcomed into homes as a teacher than as a preacher. “When God’s love is extended to children, it leads to meaningful community engagement,” she explained. MMP designs its curriculum to care for students holistically.

Meanwhile, the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC) actively engages in interfaith and inter-political dialogue and develops good relationships across different groups. “We need to engage in society on different levels,” director Peñamora said. “Neighborliness, regardless of differences, is part of our mandate as Christians.”

That’s why PCEC is active in relief distribution when natural disasters like typhoons or earthquakes strike. With support from PCEC, many evangelicals built houses for Muslims in Lapayan, Lanao del Norte, after the 2017 Marawi siege when ISIS-affiliate militants overtook the city. The group was also heavily involved in peacebuilding in the region, and have seen that building relationships with the community have helped with lessening animosity among people of different faiths.

Peñamora longs for the local church to form relationships in the community that are not imperialistic or hierarchical. He believes church leaders should not be passive or apathetic to issues happening outside of church walls. Instead, churches need to meet people where they are, as Jesus did, and be worthy of trust.

“The more we get involved within the community, the more we are trusted,” Peñamora said.

Church Life

For the Warming of the Earth: Worshiping in the Age of Creation Care

Christian artists work at the intersection of music and climate change.

Christianity Today April 18, 2024
Bernd Dittrich / Unsplash

Christians love to sing about creation. Hymns like “How Great Thou Art” describe the beauty of creation that moves the church to sing, “I see the stars, I hear the rolling thunder / Thy power throughout the universe displayed.”

Nature can also be a source of confusion or anxiety for believers as they observe eclipses and earthquakes and try to discern God’s role or intent in their unfolding. And as climate change more visibly impacts humans, the natural world can seem increasingly hostile, even as it remains a source of inspiration and joy for the Christian.

Where is God’s hand at work? And how should we respond to mysteries and chaos in our prayers and worship?

British scholar Mark Porter believes the Christian imagination can hold a complex view of creation—as can music. His research looks at the intersection of music, faith, and climate change, showing ways to engage nature beyond using it as a signpost of God’s glory, contending also with its beauty, chaos, fragility, and brutality.

“There’s not just one thing that nature imagery does,” said Porter. “It can do something besides inspire an individual to look to God in worship.”

Porter’s forthcoming book For the Warming of the Earth: Music, Faith, and Ecological Crisis describes how faith communities and organizations are responding to climate change and environmental crises with music, such as Resound Worship’s Doxecology album, the activism of groups like Christian Climate Action (CCA), and Catholic song festivals centered on Pope Francis’ landmark encyclical, Laudato Si’.

It’s not a how-to book for worship leaders looking to more explicitly address creation care or environmental justice, but the resource offers a window into a variety of Christian practices and postures around worship and creation.

Classic songs like “For the Beauty of the Earth” and “This Is My Father’s World” and more recent offerings like “God of Wonders” turn observations of aesthetic and sensory wonder into outpourings of praise. Their verses describe ornate details and panoramas, punctuated by laudatory refrains like “Christ, our Lord, to thee we raise / This our hymn of grateful praise” and “God of wonders beyond our galaxy / You are holy, holy.”

Porter, a senior lecturer at the University of Erfurt in Germany, pointed out that the popular hymn “When Peace, Like a River (It Is Well with My Soul)” offers a more multifaceted acknowledgement of humankind’s relationship with nature.

“You have ‘when peace, like a river’ and ‘sorrows like sea billows,’” he said. “Nature is there as both potentially comforting and potentially threatening.”

The mystery of nature—its majesty and violence—has always been a fount of creative inspiration for Christian artists, but most popular hymns and worship songs put nature imagery to use in one particular way: as a way to be moved to praise.

“It’s just me and God and nothing else,” said Porter. “That’s a fairly recent development. And I think there are ways to go back into Protestant thinking and rescue some things.”

The charismatic influence in these songs, though, also brings a willingness to look for God’s hand in everything. “From that perspective, God can use anything to speak to us, a butterfly or a bird,” he said.

Climate change is still a contentious issue among American Christians, with roughly half of white evangelicals saying that the phenomenon is most likely caused by natural processes—across all Americans, only 28 percent hold that view.

But while many evangelicals may be skeptical of projections showing escalating climate change–related deaths and the human contribution to environmental change, they are more likely than other Americans to believe that God causes natural disasters.

Most Christians reject animism—attributing divine power or “ensouledness” to creation—but still look for the hand of God in natural events. So while the issue of climate change may cause division, Christians broadly pay attention to changes in the environment, whether watching for signs of apocalypse or human-caused damage, and they find these changes meaningful.

They also take notice when natural disasters cause human suffering, which, in Porter’s view, may be the thing that starts to move more Christians’ opinion on the issue. He’s seen churches on both sides of the pond grow more comfortable with the language of environmental and social justice than they were 10 and 20 years ago.

“There was a lot of suspicion in the church in the UK about engaging with social justice,” said Porter. “It was widely thought, That’s something that liberal churches do.”

Recent books like Kyle Meyaard-Schaap’s Following Jesus in a Warming World and scientist Katharine Hayhoe’s Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World offer Christian perspectives on living faithfully in light of climate change, but the issue remains on the fringe.

Porter pointed out that the musical initiatives and projects he writes about in the book are still very much on the periphery of their denominations and traditions, but they may be part of bringing climate conversations into more evangelical churches.

“The practices in this volume do not all rest on a sense of hope,” Porter writes in the book. “Some do not orient themselves to the future, some center on loss, and others are deliberately cautious about voicing a hope they are not sure they can really believe in. Some, in other words, might be suitable accompaniments even in a world that remains irretrievably broken.”

Some Christians criticize the nihilism of climate change advocates who talk about irreversible damage to the earth. But even if they reject nihilism as counter to the gospel, Christians may feel stuck or lost when it comes to engaging in climate justice activism. Hayhoe argues that this stuckness, not disinterest, is the stumbling block for most people.

“The biggest problem is not the people who aren’t on board; the biggest problem is the people who don’t know what to do,” Hayhoe said in an interview with The New York Times. “Connect the dots to your heart so you don’t see climate change as a separate bucket but rather as a hole in the bucket of every other thing that you already care about in your life.”

For the musicians in Porter’s book, singing, performance art, composition, and gathering in nature are all means of connecting faith, community, and creation.

Hopefulness isn’t a throughline in Porter’s book, but it is a common theme among many he spoke with.

“A lot of people involved in climate change activism are struggling to hold on to hope and it’s something that people of faith are able to offer, I think,” said Barbara Doye, one of Porter’s interviewees. Doye is an activist and musician who adapts hymns and folk songs as part of the Forest Church movement.

The interviews and vignettes in Porter’s book aren’t meant to be prescriptive—few of us will be convicted to engage in performance art or start a Forest Church—but it can help Christians see music as a way into climate work.

For those unsure where to begin, Porter points to the simplicity of the first chapter of Genesis: “God said it was good.”

https://open.spotify.com/embed/playlist/4gyEvrfcj0BWex36X48Ucc?si=956f60b96b924f49
Ideas

Biblical Literacy in a Postliterate Age

Contributor

We must always be people of the Word, but we’ll have to reimagine deep engagement with Scripture.

Christianity Today April 18, 2024
Atahan Demir / Pexels / Edits by CT

Christians are readers. We are “people of the book.” We own personal Bibles, translated into our mother tongues, and read them daily. Picture “quiet time” and you’ll see a table, a cup of coffee, and a Bible spread open to dog-eared, highlighted, annotated pages. For Christians, daily Bible reading is the minimum standard for the life of faith. What kind of Christian, some of us may think, doesn’t meet this low bar?

This vision of our faith resonates for many. It certainly describes the way I was raised. As a snapshot of a slice of the church at a certain time in history—20th-century American evangelicals—it checks out. But as a timeless vision of what it means to follow Christ, it falls short, and it does so in a way that will seriously impinge on our ability to make disciples in an increasingly postliterate culture, a culture in which most people still understand the bare mechanics of reading but overwhelmingly consume audio and visual media instead.

We can see how this literacy-focused idea of Christianity will fail in the future by looking to the past. For most of Christian history, most believers were illiterate. Reading the Bible daily wasn’t an option because reading wasn’t an option.

This doesn’t mean Scripture was irrelevant to ordinary Christians’ lives. But the sacred page wasn’t primarily a private matter for personal devotion; it was a public matter heard in the gathering of God’s people for worship. The Bible was the church’s book—a liturgical book, a book whose natural habitat was the voice of Christ’s body lifted in praise. To hear the Word of God, you joined the people of God. Lectors read aloud for the benefit of all.

In these contexts, an injunction to read one’s Bible daily would’ve been as meaningful as advice about how to refuel one’s private jet. For us, looking back, the lesson is that what we take for granted about following Christ may not be true for all believers, always and everywhere. What’s appropriate or even necessary in our time and place may not apply to others. Discipleship practices may be more dependent upon technology and wider social practices than we often realize.

Consider, for example, the effects of the printing press, public education, and mass literacy on the church. Tales of a dark age in which church leaders suppressed literacy so often miss their mark because it’s impossible to have a reading public without cheap books, and it’s impossible to have cheap books without the printing press. The habits and purposes of reading occur in a society, in a culture, in a massively complex moral and technological environment. Reading that strikes us as necessary in one time and place will be unnecessary—if not imprudent or outright impossible—in another.

Moreover, it’s not self-evident from Scripture itself that the Christian life is inherently a reading life. How could it be, when every book of the canon was written at a time when most of God’s people could not read? In this light, our emphasis on personal, private reading of Scripture appears to be a modern innovation distinct not only from much of Christian history but from biblical history as well.

So literacy cannot be synonymous with faithful discipleship. That is a given. The question is what role it plays once mass literacy is our social reality. In many traditions, the church’s answer over the last few centuries has been to put a Bible in people’s hands as soon as possible and as often as possible, and to encourage Bible reading as a central component of one’s daily walk with Christ. Christians are readers today because of the remarkable vision and untold labor on the part of mothers and fathers in the faith going back a dozen generations.

For those of us who have benefitted, the only fitting response is gratitude. I often hear jokes among friends about growing up with “sword drills” and “Bible bowls.” Some claim they can still list all the Davidic kings from Solomon to the Exile. The jokes are always laced with thanks, and with a tinge of nostalgia. They may have rolled their eyes 30 years ago, but now, with kids of their own, they look back to an analog church childhood with a dawning realization of how much has been lost.

That next question—what we’ve lost—is perennial, but lately it has become acute regarding the state of the next generation’s literacy, their ability to engage fluently with a given text. In February, writing at Slate, Adam Kotsko sounded the alarm on college students’ reading comprehension. In March, on Substack, Jean Twenge shared empirical research backing up Kotsko’s concerns.

The statistics are dismal. In 2021 and 2022, for example, 2 out of 5 high school seniors reported not reading a single book for pleasure in the previous year. This is about four times as many compared to 1976. Other studies suggest similar things about American adults, especially men.

Each year, I teach hundreds of undergraduates of every class and major, and these reports jibe with my own experience. My students are mostly non-denominational evangelicals attending a private Christian liberal arts university in West Texas. I like to give them an anonymous survey that asks a single question: How many books have you ever read cover to cover? My only provisos are that the book couldn’t have been assigned by a teacher and that it had to be above an eighth-grade reading level (say, harder than Harry Potter). Most students’ total is below five. Many list two, one, or zero.

The reasons for this decline in long-form literacy are surely many. Like others, I’m inclined to lay the lion’s share of the blame on television, streaming, smartphones, and social media. But whatever the causes, this is our reality.

American society is no longer composed of readers of books and other written works that require sustained, rational attention—if it ever was. In the words of Neil Postman, the “typographic” culture birthed by Protestantism no longer exists. This is as true inside the church as it is outside the church.

The practical question, then, is not whether this is our world but what to do about it. How do we interact with Scripture when mass literacy as we have known it is no more?

In a recent book, Jessica Hooten Wilson writes the following:

Against the seduction of screens, we must return to the love of the book, beginning and ending with the Bible but including other books that enlighten Scripture for us and show us how to live like Jesus in our own time and place. Reading must be a daily spiritual practice for the Christian. A life of reading counteracts the malformation of screen and digital technology.

Likewise, in a recent essay responding to Kotsko and other elegies for lost literacy, Alan Jacobs writes that “many parents are putting up a fight” against childhoods void of books. In evangelical churches and classical Christian schools, habits of reading are still being modeled, taught, and “centered” in what it means to be a believer, a neighbor, a citizen. First at Wheaton College and now in the Honors College at Baylor University, Jacobs sees the imprint left on these students, who are products of an odd subculture for which “reading was an integral part.”

As a fellow reader, teacher, and parent of bookish kids, far be it from me to dissent from Jacobs’s conclusion that “abject submission isn’t inevitable. It turns out that resistance isn’t futile after all.” It is possible to raise children to be readers, to teach them to love reading. My goal with students is the same: to convert as many of them as I can from the lure of the screen to the love of the page. Occasionally I succeed. The fight is worth it, no matter the odds!

Nevertheless, I fear we educators and parents—and with us, pastors and elders—are not seeing the forest for the trees. Recall Hooten Wilson’s claim: Reading must be a daily spiritual practice for the Christian. Is this true? We’ve already seen that it can’t be true without qualification. But granting its context and intent, does it ring true then?

No, I don’t think it does. And the same goes for students at Wheaton, Baylor, and classical Christian academies. These are noble battles, but they remain minor skirmishes in a losing war—indeed a war that has already been lost at the national level. By and large, Americans young and old do not read books, and every trend line is pointing in the wrong direction.

Actually, pause on that last phrase: “the wrong direction.” This betrays my own class and bias. Must everyone be a reader—meaning, a daily reader of books for pleasure? Is reading an essential part of the good life? An essential part of the Christian life?

I’m not so sure. To be clear, I can’t claim to have definitive answers to these questions. What I have are tentative ideas that call for further exploration, not least by churches and Christian educators. Let me close with a few of them.

First, we are in the midst of a seismic technological shift that has already shaken the ground beneath Christians’ feet. We should not continue pretending that the old world is still with us. This includes the nature of ordinary believers’ relationship to the Bible.

Second, Christians exist within a larger social environment. If visions of daily discipleship are contingent on both technology and the wider culture, and those influences are vastly different than they were one or two centuries ago, then we should expect discipleship practices to differ as well. This does not mean we compromise on doctrine, the necessity of spiritual discipline, or our duty to love God and neighbor. It does mean that our disciplines and duties will take different forms in different circumstances—and that we must carefully discern whether we are clinging to longstanding forms because they are essential to our faith (e.g., prayer) or simply because we are nostalgic.

In a culture where most people are not daily readers of books, most Christians probably will not be daily readers of the church’s book either. Unless, that is, we believe that private, individual reading of the Bible is so foundational, so nonnegotiable that our churches ought to devote extraordinary resources to making it a countercultural possibility in the life of every ordinary believer.

Such churches would not only found and support classical academies. They would also commit to being consistently countercultural in the face of the whole ecosystem of digital technology: no screens in worship; no AI in preaching; no streaming online; no smartphones in the building; no presence on social media; no Bible apps in Bible class—only physical Bibles brought from home. Churches like these would be clear-eyed and undeceived about the nature of the threat. They would not try to have their cake and eat it too.

I’m open to that approach. But unless we’re willing to go that far, it seems to me that churches in the modern West should accept that we live in a postliterate world and therefore must minister to a postliterate people. Concretely, this means accepting that most church members are not and never will be readers, and that this is not a problem—that it does not make them less than other believers, that it does not preclude their maturity in the faith and service of God.

The upshot of this acceptance would be a changed vision of the Christian life. This too would have us looking to the past, as well as to contemporary liturgical traditions with models of worship carried over from a premodern illiterate age. Those of us in communities defined by personal Bible reading have much to learn from them.

Our congregations would not cease to be centered on God’s Word. But we would be centered differently than we have been in the past. Perhaps we need more—much more—oral reading, even memorization and performance, of the Scriptures in the assembly. Perhaps we need longer and more detailed exposition of the text in the sermon. Perhaps we need to reimagine what “biblical literacy” can mean: not necessarily the reading and rereading of one’s personal Bible, but a mind, imagination, and vocabulary shot through with the stories and characters and events of Holy Scripture.

Or perhaps not. These suggestions are tentative, as I said. I’m open to others, as all of us should be. But alternative visions are what we need. Christians have not always been readers, and it seems that for the foreseeable future, a majority of Christians will not be readers anymore. Discerning a durable form of faithfulness for this new and uncertain time is one of the pressing challenges of our day.

Brad East is an associate professor of theology at Abilene Christian University. He is the author of four books, including The Church: A Guide to the People of God and Letters to a Future Saint: Foundations of Faith for the Spiritually Hungry.

Surrogacy Makes More Babies. Pro-Lifers Should Still Oppose It.

Church leaders can offer clear moral and ethical guidance for a practice that violates biblical mandates.

Christianity Today April 18, 2024
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: Pexels

On April 8, the Vatican issued Dignitas Infinita, a 20-page document rejecting a variety of practices that violate human dignity. Unsurprisingly, these included human trafficking, violence against women, abortion, euthanasia, sex change, and child abuse. It also included surrogacy.

This isn’t the first time the pontificate has come out against this “deplorable” practice, which “fails to respect the dignity of [the] child” and “violates the dignity of the woman.” Pope Francis made waves in January when he condemned surrogacy, noting that “a child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract.”

Evangelical Christians and pastors value the life of the unborn. That’s why we march across the capital on freezing January mornings and pray outside of abortion clinics. Our motivation for child protection must also lead us to confront the ways children are impacted by the baby-making industry as well.

But when did you last hear your pastor address the issue of surrogacy from the pulpit? Odds are, never. Protestants have a dearth of official guidance on reproductive technologies. While some are clear on abortion, very few denominations have clear teachings on IVF, let alone the much rarer practice of surrogacy.

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary ethics professor Andrew T. Walker told The New York Times that when he suggested introducing a resolution about artificial reproductive technology at the denomination’s annual convention, his colleagues hesitated.

Some Christians are directly involved in surrogacy and see their role as a calling to help families have children, as CT reported in 2018. But many Christian bioethicists cite concerns. While there’s no Bible verse that commands, Thou shall not hire an economically vulnerable woman to gestate your custom-ordered baby, that doesn’t mean that there isn’t clear biblical guidance on surrogacy for Protestants.

Infertility alone should not guide our thinking, even if longing for children is a God-given desire. Christians have a distinct responsibility to protect children. Thus, when considering reproductive technologies in general, and surrogacy specifically, it is children’s rights and needs that should rank highest.

While there are a variety of adults involved—intended parents, surrogate mothers, sperm/egg sellers, lawyers, fertility doctors—along with their individual interests, from the child’s perspective, surrogacy always requires loss.

As I’ve detailed elsewhere, surrogacy splices what should be one woman—mother—into three purchasable and optional women: the genetic mother, or egg “donor,” who grants the child their biological identity; the birth mother, with whom the baby develops their first, critical bond; and the social mother, who provides daily female care to maximize the child’s development and satisfy the child’s longing for maternal love.

For children, none of these three mothers are optional. Studies have shown that if children never know their genetic mother, they often experience identity struggles. If they lose their birth mother, some believe that children experience a “primal wound” that makes bonding, trust, and attachment more challenging. And if they are deprived of a social mother, their development is impacted.

No matter what form it takes—traditional or gestational, altruistic or commercial, commissioned by gay or straight adults—surrogacy takes something away from the child. It’s not a loss that results from a fallen world, where parents who cannot or should not care for their child seek to redeem that loss through adoption. It is the infliction of an intentional loss simply because an adult wants it that way. And that violates several biblical mandates.

First, surrogacy goes against God’s protection of children. God insists that his people take child protection seriously. It’s one basis on which Job pleads his innocence: “I rescued the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to assist them” (29:12). Child sacrifice is listed among the reasons God condemned Israel to Babylonian exile (Ezek. 16:21). And even if an unborn child was harmed when the mother was accidentally struck, God insisted on proportionate punishment for the offender—an eye for an eye, a life for a life (Ex. 21:22–25). Chief among our concerns for children must be their safety and overall well-being. Surrogacy threatens both.

Second, God’s definition of a religion that is “pure and faultless” includes looking after “orphans … in their distress” (James 1:27). Adoption is one of the greatest ways we care for orphans. As the former assistant director of the largest Chinese adoption agency in the world, I was charged with upholding state, national, and international standards to ensure that adults were properly vetted and screened prior to child placement. We also ensured that money never flowed from intended parents to birth parents; otherwise, it was no longer a valid adoption but child trafficking. In adoption, adults shoulder the load in an attempt to relieve children of the burden of parental loss.

Surrogacy, on the other hand, often involves legally orphaning children via a “pre-birth order” that preemptively strips children of a relationship with genetic/birth parents. There are no adoption-like requirements for intended parents to undergo screenings, vetting, or background checks. Surrogacy also relies on direct payments to genetic/birth parents, which is arguably a form of child trafficking.

Christians are also called to defend the fatherless. The Old Testament includes dozens of commands to defend and protect the orphan. Children raised outside the protective umbrella of their parents’ lifelong marriage experience drastically diminished physical, mental, academic, and relational health, exploitation, and poverty. In biblical times and now, the fatherless stand out as a demographic deserving of distinct protection because they are distinctly vulnerable.

Never before, however, has humanity faced the phenomenon of “the motherless.” A woman is required to be connected to the child for the first nine months. After birth, biological systems chemically knit together mother and baby, making post-birth abandonment of the child unlikely. Historically, if the mother died during or soon after childbirth, the baby would often die as well. Only surrogacy enables what is utterly foreign to the human race—a motherless baby.

Some surrogacy apologists point to the lack of data on children who grew up from birth without a mother as evidence that there must be no harm. The absence of data is actually the greatest alarm bell. The data on the harms of fatherlessness are well known. The statistics on motherless children, given that children have an even greater bond with their mother during the first three years of life, would likely be much more devastating.

Whenever you read of God’s admonishment to protect the fatherless, it’s safe to assume the mandate applies to the motherless as well. Far from protecting the motherless, surrogacy manufactures the motherless.

Finally, God calls his people to sacrifice for the vulnerable. A biblical meta-principle runs throughout Scripture: The strong are to sacrifice for the weak, not vice versa (Ps. 82:3; Jer. 22:16; Prov. 31:8–9). God warns of cruel punishment for adults who would cause “little ones” to stumble (Matt. 18:6). He demonstrated his “sacrifice for the weak” principle on a cosmic scale when Christ, the strongest of all, died for the ungodly “while we were still powerless” (Rom. 5:6). Surrogacy violates this meta-principle because it always requires the weak (children) to sacrifice for the strong (adults).

Sisters and brothers of the Reformation, we don’t need a papal encyclical, decree, or motu proprio. We have the all-sufficient Word of God, which directs us to reject any practice or process that victimizes children.

Katy Faust is founder and president of the global nonprofit Them Before Us and coauthor of a book by the same name. She speaks and writes on why marriage and family are matters of justice for children.

News

After United Methodist Split, Some Conservatives Remain

Study: 24 percent of clergy in North Carolina are still opposed to same-sex marriage.

A United Methodist church in Cherokee, North Carolina.

A United Methodist church in Cherokee, North Carolina.

Christianity Today April 18, 2024
Wally Holden / unsplash

After the departure of thousands of traditionalist United Methodist churches from the denomination over the past five years, it might stand to reason that those congregations remaining in the fold are more progressive and open to ordination and marriage of people in same-sex relationships.

But the picture is far more mixed.

A new report from the Religion and Social Change Lab at Duke University that looked at disaffiliating clergy from North Carolina’s two United Methodist conferences or regions found that even after the departures, 24 percent of North Carolina clergy remaining in the denomination disagree with allowing LGBTQ people to get married or ordained within the denomination.

“At least some amount of ambivalence over LGBTQ+ issues among UMC clergy is likely to persist for years to come,” the report concluded.

After a four-year COVID-19 delay and the departure of about 7,600 churches—a loss of 25 percent of all its US congregations—the denomination is likely to reconsider the issue of human sexuality when it convenes its top legislative body April 23–May 3 in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Given that the denomination is a worldwide body, with hundreds of delegates from Africa and the Philippines, areas far more conservative in their views of human sexuality, it’s unclear whether the measures stand a chance of passing, even as the US delegation is far more open to such changes.

Overall, the Duke report finds that disaffiliating North Carolina clergy were much more politically and theologically conservative than those who chose to remain. Some 85 percent of clergy who left the denomination disagreed with the notion that “all religious leadership positions should be open to people in same-sex relationships.”

Leaving clergy members tended to be more homogeneous in their beliefs and to lead somewhat smaller and more rural churches. Nearly all (94%) of leaving clergy were white. More than a fourth of leaving clergy—26 percent—were licensed local pastors, meaning they were not ordained and had less advanced ministerial training.

But the report paints a picture of a reconstituted denomination that, at least in North Carolina, is politically and theologically diverse. Based on clergy’s assessments of their own congregations, 59 percent of remaining congregations are evenly divided between Republican and Democratic parties, 2.2 percent lean Republican, and 18 percent lean Democratic.

“It would be a mistake to say that the denomination in the US has moved to being virtually uniformly progressive,” said Lovett Weems, director of the Lewis Center for Church Leadership at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, DC, who did not consult on the report. “Clearly, those who left were almost universally conservative politically and theologically. But those staying show a more mixed picture.”

A total of 671 churches across North Carolina left the United Methodist Church: 325 congregations in the North Carolina Conference, covering the eastern half of the state, and 346 congregations in the Western North Carolina Conference, covering the western half. The report was based on the two conferences’ updated clergy records and compared with a 2021 longitudinal survey of clergy.

Those churches accounted for some 139,361 members and thousands of others who attended regularly or sporadically. The southeastern region of the US has the most United Methodist churches.

The study also showed that 59 percent of North Carolina pastors staying in the denomination said they are at least somewhat more liberal than most people within their congregation.

“For a long time, studies have shown that clergy in mainline denominations tend to be a bit more liberal than their membership. And this just kind of takes it one step further,” said Weems. “We should recognize that the denomination is still more middle of the road than on the progressive end of things.”

Books

Finding an Uncontainable God Within Finite Poetic Spaces

Eastern Orthodox poet Scott Cairns reflects on his new collection, his journey of faith, and poetry’s capacity to apprehend inexhaustible realities.

Christianity Today April 17, 2024
Illustration by Christianity Today / Source Images: WikiMedia Commons

Fans of the Harry Potter series might recall the magical tents from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. In the film version, when the Weasleys take Harry and others to the Quidditch World Cup, the audience sees rows and rows of small tents, seemingly designed to sleep only one or two people. Harry is confused as he witnesses the others walk into a single tent, which can hold much more than its external size betrays. Once Harry follows suit, he stands in awe at a spacious interior containing several bunkrooms, a dining room, and a large living room.

Lacunae: New Poems

Lacunae: New Poems

Paraclete Press

112 pages

$24.61

This scene gives a helpful image for the ideas and realities Scott Cairns takes up in his new collection of poems, Lacunae. Cairns is an Eastern Orthodox poet whose work, besides ten poetry collections, includes essays, a spiritual memoir, and the text of two oratorios. Many of the poems in Lacunae concern the mystery of divine things, infinite in scope, somehow fitting within finite spaces and times. Just as Harry Potter was surprised to find all that was contained within an ostensibly small tent, one is shocked to find the fullness of God contained in Mary, and even more so, contained within every Christian by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Joey Jekel, a writer and classical educator in Texas, spoke with Cairns about Lacunae, as well as the nature of poetry and the theology that informs his own.

To borrow language from Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, could you give a brief account of your “sacred history?”

I was raised as a Baptist, albeit a Baptist of what we might call a particularly brittle sort. I suppose the saving grace of those years was that my parents wore our community’s fundamentalism relatively lightly. My father liked saying that a Christian should seek to “be winsome, in order to win some.” In any case, I never felt as besieged as some others seemed to feel; in fact, the profound love of God that I learned in that community kept me feeling deliciously free, unafraid, and welcoming.

In college, thanks to the example of my older brother, Steve, I first began reading what we call “the fathers of the early church,” and it was in their witness that I recognized that so many of the resistances I had felt toward what I heard in our Baptist church were based on historically sound intuitions. In those years, I had thought that I was the heretic, but it turned out I was mistaken. It would take me many years of reading in that early tradition to eventually find my way to Orthodoxy in 1998. When I did, I felt that I was coming home.

You use the words nous and noetic frequently in your poetry and nonfiction writing. Can you explain how and why you use these words?

Early on in my slow journey to the fullness of the faith that one finds in Orthodoxy, I noted a range of unsatisfactory dichotomies I had nearly inherited as a result, in large part, of the church’s split between East and West. Certain of those dichotomies result from unfortunate translation, and the choice, in most translations, of rendering nous as “mind” is perhaps one of the most unfortunate.

While the word has evolved somewhat over the millennia, most of our early church tradition understands it as being more than mind, or reason, or thought; it is better apprehended, as the late Bishop Kallistos Ware has characterized it, as the “intellective aptitude of the heart.” In other words, it’s the meeting place of intellect and felt knowledge, the meeting place of mind and heart.

Orthodoxy has taught me that the human person is best figured as a complex animal, one with a soul—a spirit—and bearing noetic relationship to the one God. And since our God is characterized in the interpersonal terms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we also bear noetic relationship to other human persons. In fact, you could say that our very personhood depends on these relationships.

We are not—contrary to what I had gathered in the church of my childhood—bodiless intellects. We are not aspiring to transcend our bodies. We are not angels, nor are we fixing to become angels. We are, however, fixing to become like God; made in his image, we are called to grow into his likeness—never eclipsing his endless and inexhaustible holiness, but by our adoption and identification with Jesus, becoming like the God who called us into being.

Can you explain “Isaak the Least,” a name to whom you attribute many epigraphs and poems throughout your collections?

My journey to the Eastern church involved some three decades of reading in the writings of the early church. I had come to embrace much of what I read in those texts, but when I came upon The Ascetical Homilies of Saint Isaak the Syrian, my heart finally came home. Those homilies led me down the final stretch of road to a place where I recognized in writing many of the countless intuitions I had glimpsed along the way. When I was formally brought into the Greek Orthodox Church, I was brought in as Isaak, with Saint Isaak of Syria being—as we say—my “namesaint.” The character of Isaak the Least became a fictive speaker in much of my work since then.

Iconography features heavily in your work, none more than Our Lady of the Sign in Lacunae. Could you talk a bit about the role of iconography in the Orthodox faith and in this current collection?

The icon is itself something of a theological assertion. Icons of Christ, in particular, are understood to be a confession that Christ was both God and a fully human person who could be depicted in the icon. I’ve often bristled a bit at the commonplace description of icons as “windows into heaven.” That notion seems to emphasize a distance and otherworldliness of God and his saints. The profound activity of an icon is, rather, an insistence of Christ’s presence here with us, as well as the insistence that the saints—so great a cloud of witnesses (Heb. 12:1)—are also here with us. The illusions of time and distance are mitigated by our being in the midst of those historical moments and those historical persons we cherish.

As for the lovely icon on the cover of Lacunae, it is a familiar one that graces the dome over the altar spaces in most of our churches. In Greek, it is identified as Πλατυτέρα των Ουρανών, or the “more spacious than the heavens” icon, and it speaks to the fact that the uncontainable God was nonetheless held within Mary’s human womb. This gesture speaks to the heart of what I mean when I speak of the poetic operation of language; I’ve often characterized that operation as the presence and activity of inexhaustible, indeterminate enormity apprehended within a discreet space. My sense of that essential quality of poetry is what led me to fix upon this notion of lacunae—openings or spaces that suggest more than they appear to contain.

I’m recalling that odd passage in Colossians, where Paul avers that he rejoices in his sufferings for the sake of the church, saying that in his flesh he is filling up “what is still lacking” in the suffering of Christ (1:24). That is an unfortunate translation, given that we are loathe to imagine that anything is lacking in anything Christ performs. My own translation would not be what is lacking, but what is yet to be done—which is, I dare say, the offering of our willing participation in this suffering.

Your poetry covers the topic of distraction and getting away from it. How is a Christian supposed to deal with the distractions of life?

I guess the best answer is to pray without ceasing. One must develop a constant sense of God’s nearness, an awareness of his being always with us, which assists our moving through all manner of distractions, whether they arise from cruel or ignorant people, natural or unnatural tragedies, our sufferings, or our own sin. So far as I know, the best path for developing that sense is the Jesus Prayer: “Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.” For over two millennia, many believers have depended on that practice to help maintain this clarifying sense of God with us.

The Orthodox liturgy is also profoundly helpful in this regard. The practice of living through the full church year, assisted by a sequence of services, also makes our faith not just a grip of propositions, but a developing sense of who we are and whose we are.

The poet Rainer Maria Rilke, in his Letters to a Young Poet, makes a connection between the art of poetry and the art of living. Do you see a connection between these two endeavors?

I think that our primary art must be the shaping of ourselves. I also think that any endeavor that we can rightly call a vocation is best understood as a means to better apprehending who we are and what we are called to become. So, yes, for those called to the art of poetry, that calling is utterly connected to the art of living, of living well and in a way that enhances our own spiritual journeys, even as it enhances the journeys of others.

Success in the art of poetry and in the art of living depends on a deeper development of the art of prayer. Early on, I tended to resist the associations of poetry with prayer, but, in my dotage, I have given up that resistance. So long as we understand that prayer is less about petition than it is about communion, and so long as we understand that poetry is less about expression than it is about pressing language for illumination, then we can glimpse how each can serve the other.

Could you explain the concept of apophatic theology, or a humility before mystery in Scripture? What is the value and beauty in this theological approach?

Theology comes in two flavors—the cataphatic and the apophatic. Both approaches are witnessed throughout the church, both now and historically. The cataphatic approach—which, broadly speaking, is more comfortable making definite statements about God and his nature—is perhaps the more familiar in the West. And the apophatic—fair to say—holds primacy in the East.

The greatest dangers of a cataphatic approach can be seen whenever a pastor or theologian presumes to explain away the mysteries manifested in the Scriptures, whenever a glib paraphrase threatens to eclipse an inexhaustible text. The Eastern church privileges a more Hebraic, more rabbinical approach to theological commentary, offering a provisional sense of what a passage might offer. This modest gesture in the face of mystery strikes me as a far preferable disposition compared to the arrogance of a pastor’s offering his own interpretation and saying of it, This is what God says.

What do you mean by saying that “there is One True Church, variously apprehended”?

I’m reminded of a trick question that I heard a while back. The question was “How many churches do you have in this town?” The only correct answer was “One.”

If the church is understood to be the body of Christ, then it must be self-evident that all of its members—despite their differences—are members of that one body.

So, yes, regardless of the familiar divisions—and the profoundly regrettable term denominations—the body of Christ is unalterably one. I also think that most historical divisions can be read as sequential diminishments of the faith.

I’m also reminded of what my first priest, Father George Paulson, said to me when I met him to say that I wanted to “convert” to Orthodoxy. He said, “Convert? What are you now? Muslim? Hindu?” He encouraged me to understand my becoming Orthodox as my “embracing the fullness of the faith” and not as a “conversion.”

So, yes, we are all—like it or not—members of one body, one church; we are simply perceiving that body variously, to varying degrees of fullness.

Is there anything else you would like to mention, either about this collection of poetry or your work in general?

Only that I don’t see any of my successive poetry collections as new departures or as manifesting novel approaches. I think of each as a developmental step in the direction I’ve hoped to be moving from the first. The poems are my way of examining my heart and mind, my way of coming to terms, if only provisional terms, with what I glimpse in the midst of that examination.

I continue to be concerned with becoming, with our collective becoming, knowing that none of us will ever cease becoming. The God into whose likeness we are moving is an inexhaustible God, and our journey into partaking of God’s holiness is an endless journey.

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