Theology

What I Would Change After 30 Years of Marriage

I should have invited Ruth to our wedding—to acknowledge how much our ordinary moments point to the story of Christ.

Christianity Today May 24, 2024
Illustration by Mallory Rentsch Tlapek / Source Images: Getty / WikiMedia Commons

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

On Monday of next week, my wife, Maria, and I celebrate our 30th wedding anniversary. As I think about those two kids standing at the altar, I would want to say “I do” all over again to everything. One of the very few exceptions would be one decision that had to do with the wedding, not with the marriage. After 30 years, I’ve changed my mind about the biblical text I wouldn’t let us read.

Somebody suggested that we read at the ceremony a passage from the Old Testament book of Ruth, one that we heard read or sung at almost every wedding at the time. In the King James Version (which was what people almost always used), the text reads, “Whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God” (1:16). It’s about the young widow Ruth from Moab, pledging to her dead husband’s mother, Naomi, that she would go with her to Naomi’s homeland of Israel.

I believed then, and still do, that all Scripture is inspired and “profitable” (2 Tim. 3:16, ESV throughout), but I didn’t think that particular Scripture was appropriate for a wedding.

“It’s not about marriage,” I said. “It’s about someone taking a trip with her mother-in-law.” I wanted something about the mystery of Christ in Ephesians 5 or about love from Song of Songs or about Jesus at the wedding at Cana. I could even have lived, I said, with 1 Corinthians 13. Of all of the things about the wedding ceremony, I only insisted on two—that we use the traditional vows and that we read some other text than that one. You could say that I was ruthless in my Ruthlessness.

If I can give some unwanted advice to my 22-year-old self, the groom, I would say to him, “You are right about the bride, and right to ask her to marry you. This will be the best earthly decision you will make in the course of your life, but you are wrong about Ruth. That text has everything to do with your next 30 years.”

Thirty years ago, I knew how to preach about the cosmic mystery of Christ and his church, a mystery reflected in marriage. I knew that I loved this woman, and I didn’t want to be with anybody else. And I knew enough to know that the old vows were better, that we needed the words our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents had vowed. How could we describe our commitment better than “for better or for worse … till death us do part”?

I know some people who have had hard marriages. Some marriages I admire greatly have been, I know, a fierce struggle to keep together. Ours is not one of those. We’ve faced far more “better” than “worse,” and even when the worse has arrived, it was always better because of her. That’s mostly because I’m the quirky one and she’s the stable, unshakable one.

In the biblical account, Naomi, grieving the death of her sons, insists that both of her daughters-in-law stay behind in Moab, where they can start their lives over again. Ruth, though, was committing, before God, to walk into a future completely unknown to her. And so were we.

If you had asked those two kids back at the altar in Biloxi, Mississippi—one of us 22 years old, the other 20—what our life story would be, we couldn’t have predicted how much we would laugh together. I’m not sure we could have predicted how—30 years later—we would still want to be around each other all the time.

We wouldn’t have known what it would be like to hold each other after getting the phone call about a father’s death, or what it would be like to feel the other trembling in tears after a miscarriage. We wouldn’t have known what it would be like to trek out together to a Russian orphanage to adopt two little boys, nor what it would be like to see in a hospital room our other three boys who came to us the more typical way.

I wouldn’t have known that the only ultimatum I would ever hear from my wife was about whether we’d ever attend another Southern Baptist business meeting. I couldn’t have foreseen how much the words Donald Trump would shape the circumstances of our lives, or that that year would outlast the seven years of tribulation our Sunday School prophecy charts had promised.

What I really would not have predicted, though, is how—just like the story of Ruth—so much of our story would be made up not in those “big” moments but in the very small, ordinary ones: the fleeting encounter in the gleaning field, the midnight meeting in the threshing place, the birth of a baby.

Naomi said at the beginning that she should rename herself “bitter” (1:20), but the text shows us the turnaround of her now rejoicing with Ruth’s newborn on her lap. The women of the neighborhood said of this old widow, who once thought her story was over, “A son has been born to Naomi” (4:17). Many things that seemed to be coincidences—just the right thing happening at the right time—led up to that.

Last night, Maria and I walked with our youngest son down to the creek by our house, where our son climbed some trees as we walked the dog. The cicadas were buzzing and the fireflies were flashing all around. I stopped and wanted to freeze that moment in time. It was almost as if a future version of myself was time traveling back to whisper, This is the best. This is the sort of thing you will remember on your deathbed. Those are the moments that shape a life, that surprise us with joy.

I didn’t want Ruth at the wedding because I thought I knew how words worked. I was, after all, a preacher and a former political speechwriter, and an aspiring theologian. I wanted our wedding to be focused on the big story of Christ and his gospel—and an out-of-context Bible verse about some women who’d lost their husbands just wouldn’t do. My problem was that I couldn’t see that that little narrative is about the big story of Christ and his gospel. The conversation led to the trip, and the trip led to love, and the love led to a birth for a family from Bethlehem. The story ends with the mention of that baby, Obed, but not as a mere “happily ever after” resolution of the storyline.

The book ends with the words, “Obed fathered Jesse, and Jesse fathered David” (4:22). The setting is cast for what would happen from Bethlehem in the books to follow, 1 and 2 Samuel, of the shepherd-musician who would be promised that one of his sons would sit on his throne: “He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever” (2 Sam. 7:13).

Ruth didn’t know that her promise to one old woman would end up leading to Israel’s king—nor that Israel’s king would lead to the deliverance of that family line from existential threat, all the way through to another story, that of a worker and a virgin, a story that would end up, again, with a baby in Bethlehem, one in whom the entire cosmos holds together, one whose kingdom will never end.

Your little story, and mine, aren’t quite so messianic in their stakes. But, then again, maybe they are, in some way. The Bible says that everything working around us ends up for good, and then defines what that good is—that we would be “conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers” (Rom. 8:29). All of that comes about in each of our lives through lots of little decisions that ripple out in ways we can’t see. Every once in a while, though, we can look back and see some words—like I do—that were the right words to the right person—words that we can only explain by grace.

Jesus is Lord. All of the story of Scripture—all of the story of the universe, visible and invisible—is his story. He holds the keys of life and death. And sometimes he stops by a wedding (John 2:1–2). Sometimes, in a wedding or, better yet, in a marriage, one can get a glimpse of his glory (2:11).

Thirty years ago, we said to each other that we would love, comfort, honor, and keep each other, in sickness and in health, forsaking all others, as long as we both shall live. I would say those words again. But I might add some other words too—“Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you” (Ruth 1:17).

At either my funeral or Maria’s, people can read any number of Bible passages; I love them all. But, if you’re there, know there’s one of them that I am happy for you to read or to sing or just to remember, because I will mean it then as I do now: “Whither thou goest, I will go.”

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

News

Iranian Christians Contemplate God’s Justice after President’s Death in Crash

Believers in the diaspora reference Daniel and the “writing on the wall” as many mull if helicopter accident portends more changes to come.

A woman passes by a poster of Iran's late president Ebrahim Raisi who died in a helicopter crash.

A woman passes by a poster of Iran's late president Ebrahim Raisi who died in a helicopter crash.

Christianity Today May 23, 2024
Majid Saeedi / Stringer / Getty / Edits by CT

Iranian Christians in the diaspora shed few tears over the death of President Ebrahim Raisi, killed in a helicopter crash along with the foreign minister and six others in the northwest mountains of Iran.

The leadership vacuum will be filled within 50 days by a new election. But it comes at a tumultuous time for the Islamic Republic, which last month launched an unprecedented missile attack against Israel. Coming in the context of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, Iran’s other proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen have harassed the Jewish state and its Western allies.

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared five days of mourning, assuring there would be no change in the nation’s direction.

Raisi’s term in office was beset by internal protests over religious repression, alongside discontent with an inflationary economy. But while he oversaw restoration of diplomatic ties with rival Saudi Arabia, relations with the West severely deteriorated due to strengthening ties with Russia and China, as Iran enriched its uranium supply in suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

“Countless thousands of Christians are specifically praying for God’s will in Iran,” said Lana Silk, CEO of Transform Iran, which oversees a network of churches in the nation. “I believe his hand is on all these key events.”

She advised the Western church to pray for new God-fearing leadership.

Of the now deceased leader, Christians expressed a diverse emotional response.

“From all of my contacts, the reaction among educated and socially engaged Iranians is joy,” said Shirin Taber, executive director of Empower Women Media, dedicated to the promotion of international religious freedom. “With the potential for change, there is always hope.”

An Iranian-American Christian, she said these deaths demonstrate that not only is the regime not invincible, it is on the decline. Reports indicated that the presidential helicopter unwisely departed in deep fog and also suffered mechanical failure.

Taber also leads the Abraham Women’s Alliance to strengthen the Abraham Accords, a US government–led effort to normalize relations between Muslim nations and Israel. In this time of transition in Iran, she encouraged Western nations to continue to “lean in” to the push for democracy.

Raisi, age 63, was elected in 2021 with the lowest turnout recorded since Iran’s revolution in 1979. Analysts blamed widespread disillusion, as clerical leadership severely limited the pool of candidates to those with demonstrated loyalty to Ayatollah Khamenei. Raisi was also considered to be the primary candidate to succeed the 85-year-old supreme leader.

Sources noted the widespread speculations over the crash. Some rumors immediately suspected Israel, while others wondered about internal power struggles. Iran has not suggested foul play.

But while state media broadcast scenes of mourning at the funeral and in the streets of Iran, diaspora images showed dancing in the streets. Some Christian voices were more muted.

“My initial reaction is that justice was done,” said Amir Bazmjou, CEO of Torch Ministries and an Oxford-based PhD candidate in political science and Christian theology. “God heard the voices of families who lost their loved ones unjustly because of Raisi.”

Referring to the president by his infamous title “Butcher of Tehran” due to his role in the “death committee” that executed thousands of prisoners, Bazmjou cited the Ezekiel 18:23 reference that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

Raisi, born into a clerical family, joined in the initial protests against the Shah of Iran at age 15, and by age 25 became deputy prosecutor of Tehran. In 1988, he was one of four judges on the secret tribunal that retried already imprisoned enemies of the regime.

In 2009, Raisi backed crackdowns on protestors and their mass incarcerations following the disputed presidential election. And as president, in 2022, he oversaw the security response against demonstrations sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman detained over her allegedly loose hijab. Over 500 people were killed, with 22,000 detained.

The US sanctioned Raisi in 2019 for his role in domestic repression.

Bazmjou encouraged Western empathy over the death of Iran’s president, but to stand with the oppressed public while avoiding siding with the regime. Such was the US response, expressing condolences while reaffirming support for the people and their “struggle for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

But as the pool of approved politicians tightens, Bazmjou believed that the helicopter deaths contribute to the further shrinking of core loyalists that can assume future leadership positions. Like Taber, he believes these gaps may foretell significant change in the near future.

This would accord with a picture provided in Scripture, he said.

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, PARSIN, read the writing on the wall in Daniel 5—God’s message to King Belshazzar of Babylon. God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.

“I pray for the political leaders in Iran to turn from their dark ways and encounter the God of love, justice, and holiness,” said Bazmjou. “Otherwise, God’s justice will come for the voiceless, Christians included.”

A recent survey suggested there are nearly one million believers inside Iran.

For any who celebrate, he cited Proverbs 21:15 as appropriate for both Christians and Iranian leaders—When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.

Mansour Borji agreed, citing Psalm 55:15—Let death take my enemies by surprise. Christians may not fully comprehend the relationship between God’s mercy and his judgment, said the director of the Iranian religious freedom advocacy organization Article18, but he allows the frustrated to express their anger at those who harm their fellow citizens.

As Raisi violated the rights of minorities, Borji is somewhat frustrated still.

“It would have been better for him to face trial and be held accountable for his crimes,” he said. “But the world is a safer place without him.”

Silk, however, warned that potential internal Iranian power struggles would not bode well for citizens, as authorities will rule with an even tighter fist. Persecution against Christians will continue and perhaps intensify.

But as Bazmjou found biblical parallel with the king of Babylon, Silk referenced a prophecy about ancient Elam, located in modern-day Iran. Restoration is promised, she said, but not before judgment. In Jeremiah 49:38, God states, I will set my throne in Elam, and destroy her king and officials.

“We cannot presume to know God’s mind,” Silk said. “But things are accelerating, and I wonder if the major shift we have been anticipating is closer than we think.”

Theology

In Succor and Silence

On praying past the end of silver linings to a God who often does not answer as I hope.

Christianity Today May 23, 2024
Illustration by Elizabeth Kaye / Source Images: Getty, Unsplash

Around the bonfire at church camp on the Oregon coast, we sang “River of Life” to get warmed up, and then, to mellow the mood for the gospel presentation, “Seek Ye First.” A haunting descant rose over the melody, swelling my 12-year-old heart with grateful longing. I walked forward to accept Jesus into my heart, and a counselor prayed for me, shadows from the flames flickering across our faces.

Back home again, I needed to learn how to pray. I thought it was weird for the Lord to expect me, gangly and grappling with my fleshly nature, to carry on what felt like a nonreciprocal relationship with an invisible, inscrutable, and ineffable God—but I was willing to give it a shot.

Only I couldn’t tell if I was doing it right. “God is not a vending machine,” our youth minister told us. “You have to pray according to his will.” So I began by asking for help in various areas of self-improvement: I should be nice to my brother. I should have a cheerful attitude when vacuuming with the heavy canister Electrolux and not slam my bedroom door when I got mad. I needed to avoid Judy Blume books that celebrated masturbation and stop sneaking the M&Ms my mom hid in the freezer. God, please help me to be better.

My self-examination concluded, I tendered other requests, like to make the premier soccer team and for a boy to return a crush. When those things didn’t happen, I swallowed a slight doubt. Perhaps James 4:3 was at play here: “When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.” Maybe I had bad motives.

Much else went unasked because I didn’t know how to say it. I couldn’t compass any words to address the palpable rancor running through my family. And the salvation of various relatives—I just didn’t see how the Lord would manage it. On overnight visits with extended family, I’d lie in the guest bed and silently cry over their eternal fate as sounds filtered in from the shows the grown-ups watched in the evening. My pillow would get soggy as tears slipped into my ears, and I’d have to roll over.

I went on to attend a Christian college, where a line attributed (likely inaccurately) to Martin Luther held the weight of a decree: “I have so much to do that I shall spend the first three hours in prayer.” Accordingly, I tried morning quiet time. I’d get up, groggy and dull, and read the Gospels in small font or leaf through disturbing passages on the whoredom of Jerusalem. I wanted to hear from God, but I didn’t know how to respond to these Scriptures, even if I believed they were God-breathed and useful for teaching (2 Tim. 3:16).

I determined I was too restless to read and murmur to God in the morning and needed to occupy my hands so my mind could focus. Assured by Richard Foster that prayer is merely “bringing ordinary concerns to a loving and compassionate Father,” I made the Lord my divine pen pal, filling one notebook after another with my prayers.

After college, I worked in Mexico and worshiped with a congregation of about 15 people in a cement chapel with rough wooden pews. The pastor put psalms to music because there were no songbooks. He fingerpicked his guitar as we sang Psalm 121:

I lift up my eyes to the mountains—where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord,the Maker of heaven and earth.

Alzaré mis ojos a los montes; ¿De dónde vendrá mi socorro? Mi socorro viene de Jehová, Que hizo los cielos y la tierra.

Socorro was a new word for me, a lovely word. It meant rescue, and it had a purring, soothing sound, as relieving as rescue itself. It was too bad, I thought, that the English cognate was hard and unattractive: succor.

Hurricane Mitch hit Central America that year. In Mexico, my colleagues and I watched footage of floods and landslides, and I thought of my neighbors living in houses with thin metal roofs and dirt floors. One three-year-old, Adán, seemed to lead an especially wispy existence. He wandered around the dusty lanes, often walking into our home at mealtime, unannounced and stark naked. He would climb up to stand on a chair at the table and demand, “Y mi plato?

The Lord was a rescuer, I trusted; he cherished the little children. I prayed, aloud and in writing for two days: Please, Lord, stop the hurricane. Make it die out.

And it did. The hurricane never came to us. Mitch lost power as it moved inland and veered away to the Gulf of Mexico. It was the first time I had really prayed for safety, and my prayers were answered. We were succored—yet this outcome made me uneasy. More than 11,000 Hondurans and Nicaraguans died. Why would God spare us but not them?

A few years later, back in the States, my husband and I prayed over our children throughout the adoption process, seeking wisdom and guidance. Everything fell into place in a way that seemed divinely appointed, and three children under four were in our home within ten days of our first meeting.

Prayer immediately became harder to fit in as nurturing these little ones filled all my time. I couldn’t justify getting up early to muddle through prayer, and the tedious indoor tasks of early parenting only increased my restlessness. I began to practice kinesthetic prayer, praying through my daily workouts, memorizing Scripture and asking for God’s intervention for my family as I ran on the treadmill. I configured my mile-long swim for prayer, giving thanks and offering intercessions in neat laps. After my sets, I’d lift myself out of the water and walk across the rough pool deck, water streaming down my arms and legs, my soul limpid, almost newly baptized.

As the kids grew, we couldn’t quite shake the feeling that they were not all right, even after two, five, or ten years in our family. As they reached adolescence, we upped our therapeutic parenting, sought educational supports, set predictable routines, got weekly counseling, recruited grandparents, consulted doctors, and arranged pro-social extracurriculars. My husband and I both worked part-time so one of us would always be at home with the kids.

And I doubled down on prayer. I received a One Year Bible for Christmas and read it three years in a row. I was charmed by prophecies I hadn’t known before, describing a compassionate and just God who advocated for strangers, widows, and orphans. Scriptures became my prayers.

With Nahum 1:7, I called on the Lord to be a refuge in times of trouble. From Psalm 10, I entreated him to consider our grief and take it in hand. Luke 8 morphed into a desperate appeal that Jesus would heal my children like he healed the wild man among the graves, leaving him “dressed and in his right mind” (v. 35). I was hungry for God’s goodness and prayed continually for him to do great things for us, that we might be filled with joy.

Everything got worse.

I got so many calls with bad news. A child got kicked off a sports team for furtively flipping off teammates. A child talked suicide on the first day of school. A child was nearly expelled. My husband called me, saying that a child was long overdue from school and still not home. Later, the police showed up. The psychologist called about red flags on an assessment. A principal called me to say that they’d found my student with shards of glass and self-inflicted cuts. I was called out of a work meeting by a school counselor who was concerned about my child’s saying that “therapist” was just the words the rapist combined.

I began practicing a new kind of kinesthetic prayer that I called the “Drunk Hannah,” after the mother of Samuel, whose prayers of deep anguish were mistaken for drunken ravings (1 Sam. 1:12–14). Each morning, I walked for an hour through quiet streets, praying and crying. The brine spilled onto my cheeks and lips, and I’d come home to find my neck chalky with accumulated tears.

Our children’s early experiences, I knew, were shaping their current reality. Early trauma can shape children’s hardwiring, even physically changing their brains in a way that lowers their stress tolerance, increases their anxiety and aggression, and, heartbreakingly, short-circuits their ability to feel secure and happy with loving parents.

Our efforts to help seemed to miss the mark over and over, and my prayers, too, seemed to lead nowhere. Prayer is not a meritocracy, I told myself. His thoughts are not my thoughts; neither are my ways his ways (Is. 55:8–9). But I had studied statistics, and the biblical record strongly implied that prayer was correlated with favorable outcomes. For me, prayer seemed to make bad things happen.

Maybe the problem, I considered, was that we weren’t storming heaven’s gate in adequate numbers. I recruited a group of friends to be prayer warriors. To start, I asked them to pray for insurance to cover several outstanding medical bills. A week later, the bills were still unpaid, and one of our children was hospitalized. I renewed my request for the insurance and added a prayer for a child’s smooth transition to short-term residential treatment. A week after that, insurance hadn’t paid, and two other children were hospitalized. For months, each time I wrote my prayer team, we’d be hit by a fresh wave of unusual problems. My prayer updates, once brave calls to arms, became exercises in waiting for the other shoe to drop.

I took to pacing the sidewalk, queasy from worry and grief. “What is happening?” I whispered to the Lord. “Is this really what you are leaving us to contend with?” I felt not so much succored as suckered.

After a couple years of regular Drunk Hannah praying, we took our son backpacking with several family friends. We hoped a trip together would draw us closer following several crises, but my husband and I were also anxious to shield our companions from our son’s unpredictable outbursts. As the sun set on our first night, we lingered in easy conversation over an alfresco dinner, then peaceably retired to our tents. “Thank you, Jesus,” I breathed as I drifted to sleep.

I awoke to screams. In the pitch dark I could hear our friend Andy crying, “Oh my God! Where are you?” I crawled out into the open and felt something brush against me: the boughs of a large tree that had just fallen across a tent of sleeping children.

Andy carefully slit an opening in the tent fabric near where we heard his son crying. His legs flailed out, and we pulled the boy free. I picked him up and handed him to Julia, his mother, who sat with him in her lap, trembling but quiet. I held them to me for a few seconds, stroking Julia’s hair.

The tree had trapped their daughter by her lower legs, and she couldn’t move. Andy cupped her face in his hands, saying, over and over, “You’re okay. We’re going to get you out.” She nodded up at him and swallowed back sobs.

But the tree was impossibly large. It was five in the morning. We were seven miles out in the back country. Our group discussed what to do.

“I can get help,” I said. “I can run.” I pulled on my boots and started grabbing my keys, my phone, water, food.

“Someone needs to go with you,” Andy said. “Who else can run?”

The men needed to stay and deal with the tree, but I scanned the group and saw my son. “My son can be my buddy,” I said. “He can run.”

The two of us ran through the dark woods. We slowed to a walk on the rough parts, so we didn’t turn an ankle, then ran on, pacing the seven miles to our car as the light steadily grew. We lurched onto the porch of the ranger station near the parking spots and knocked on the door. No answer.

We drove out on the dirt road, taking one turn too fast and skidding near the lake. My son grabbed the door handle and looked at me. “I need to slow down,” I said. “If we crash, she might die.” Near a tiny grocery store, we had enough signal to call 911—and to text my pastor: “Pray that we can get the girl out; tell everyone to pray.”

“I will do that,” he responded right away. “Praying.”

It took a few hours to set up communication relays and to assemble a rescue team. As we accompanied them back up the trail, the National Park Service radioed that they were sending a helicopter.

My son asked if he could run ahead, and I said he could. He burst into the waiting group, shouting, “They’re coming! We need to find a place for a helicopter to land!” While we’d been gone, our companions had used sticks to dig under the tree, freeing the girl’s legs and lifting her, like the men seeking Jesus for their paralyzed friend (Mark 2:3–11), on a mat to a safer place.

There was nowhere to land a helicopter. The pilot hovered overhead while two rangers attached the girl’s shroud-like stretcher to the cable and clipped in beside her. The cable retracted, lifting them clear of the treetops, and then the helicopter ascended and flew off, its human cargo dangling in mid-air, a tiny bundle on a thin string.

We learned later that hundreds of people had been praying, a chain reaction set in motion and multiplied through my hasty text to my pastor. Her rescue seemed proof of God’s power and resolve. It was a miracle—the tree could have easily killed her. She had three bones set, needing no incisions, and went home in two casts.

“How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news” (Is. 52:7). We were clapped on the back and congratulated. Julia and Andy told me that my son’s return was the advent of hope for them that day. I watched closely as he unwrapped their thank-you gift, aching for him to catch some of the healing that was on offer. But their earnest gratitude seemed to bounce off, leaving him apparently untouched.

“There’s no greater honor,” one friend told me after the accident, “than being someone’s answer to prayer.” I didn’t argue. I was glad to help, but I also wanted to wave some flags to let the Lord know that there were still people who needed some serious succor over here.

God could rescue spectacularly if he wanted to—we had seen it with our very eyes. And yet I felt suckered again. We would soon be seeking residential treatment for my son because we couldn’t safely care for him at home. There would be no helicopter for us.

I didn’t understand why God’s healing of my little ones remained so far off. Why was it my job to work and watch fruitlessly? I tried to come up with explanations. Maybe it was a way to develop my emotional awareness or to grow my compassion. Maybe it was a “severe mercy,” a painful but beneficial dissolution of some hidden idolatry like self-sufficiency or salvation by works. Maybe our grapple with shame would be an example for others to triumph over their own shame. Maybe this was the deluge before the rainbow: All my children’s early pain would be resolved somehow, and the only way out was through.

Eventually I got tired of scrounging after silver linings. The plain fact was that the Lord had a flintiness about him. I wondered if I should be shouting at him, like Sonny in The Apostle, “I love you, Lord, but I am mad at you! I AM MAD AT YOU!”

But I didn’t have the energy. One angry scream, and my throat hurt.

And I wasn’t mad, exactly. God was beautiful, and I loved him. I just didn’t understand why he seemed so harsh, why he had apparently given me an impossible task and then pulled the rug out from under me. I thought I knew a little of what Moses felt when God forbade him from entering the Promised Land after all his years of service (Deut. 3:21–28).

“I can’t pray anymore,” I finally told my friend Annie. “The opposite of what I pray for keeps happening. I can’t muster the imagination. I can’t formulate the words.”

“There’s this idea that if you can’t pray, you’re far from God,” she replied. “But I think that when you can’t pray, you’re right there in the heart of God.”

The Lord was near. I knew that. I felt it in the inexplicably palpable belovedness of my soul—there was no way I could feel so alive and cherished except by God. But his nearness was explainable in another way, the way that poet Christian Wiman says is “God entering and understanding human suffering.”

When we endure suffering, Richard Foster writes, it prepares us to “enter into the anguish of others” in a way that brings healing. It becomes a ministry. Likewise, Henri Nouwen says in The Wounded Healer that our sufferings are a place where God unfurls his new creation. It’s the regenerative, redemptive way we catch glimpses of his kingdom reality.

After the accident, Julia had said to me, “I won’t be able to go camping again if you’re not there too.” These words touched me strangely. I had looked at the sorry, unsuccored estate of our family and felt that our lives were dim and disfigured, good for nothing. Instead, she saw me as a ministering presence, someone with healing to spare. “There are many things,” Oscar Romero said, “that can only be seen through eyes that have cried.”

I began to realize that wounded-healer moments beset me continually; they were darts and arrows of love shot into my life. It was like the Lord had lavish tricks up his sleeve and wasn’t above showing off.

My friends knew that I was heartbroken and regularly missing work for emergencies and appointments, but they kept calling to talk through their griefs and insecurities. “You might not have time,” one friend in ministry would say, “but I could really use some Wendy Wisdom.” Mothers told me their problems and dashed away salt drops as I listened. Young women sent me late-night messages or wistfully sidled up to me after church to talk. Strangers crossed my path, blooming under my attention.

At the end of that summer, I canceled a visit to my best friend because I couldn’t find anyone who could safely supervise my children. I felt stuck at home, disappointed and full of dread. I happened to call a neighbor, curious about her house hunt. She told me that her family of seven was moving the next day; the truck would arrive in the morning.

“Who is helping you move?” I asked.

“No one,” she said, “I’ve been too busy to ask people.”

“Can I and my three teenagers come and help?” I offered. We boxed their belongings, packed the truck, and directed the younger kids for the next two days. I had prayed for a certain kind of rescue, but, rescueless, glimpsed instead the suffering heart of Jesus and a sacred chance to minister to others. Perhaps I could say, like C. S. Lewis’s Queen Orual in Till We Have Faces, “I know now, Lord, why you utter no answer. You are yourself the answer.”

A few weeks later, I reached for my Bible and ran my fingers over the puckered pages. To whom else could I go? The Lord has the words of eternal life, and I’m a complete sucker for him.

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

Books
Review

What Believers Can and Can’t Affirm in Those Who Affirm Same-Sex Marriage

Rebecca McLaughlin takes care to filter their legitimate claims from their flawed assumptions.

Christianity Today May 23, 2024
Illustration by Mallory Rentsch Tlapek / Source Images: Getty

Maybe you believe that the Bible opposes same-sex sexual relationships. Where in the Bible would you begin to explain your view? Maybe you doubt that the Bible opposes same-sex sexual relationships. Where in the Bible would you begin to build an argument for affirmation? Or maybe you are unsure whether the Bible affirms or opposes same-sex sexual relationships. Where in the Bible would you begin to inquire about the matter?

Does the Bible Affirm Same-Sex Relationships? Examining 10 Claims about Scripture and Sexuality (Biblical response to lgbtq+, homosexuality)

Whichever position you might find yourself in, Rebecca McLaughlin’s new book will point you to precisely the place in the Bible where you should begin—with the gospel and Jesus. More about that in a bit.

The book, Does the Bible Affirm Same-Sex Sexual Relationships? Examining 10 Claims about Scripture and Sexuality, brings together two recent trends of books by evangelical writers.

One trend is believers who experience same-sex sexual attraction, or self-identify as “gay,” writing first-person accounts about their journeys of faith and sexuality. This trend includes: Wesley Hill’s Washed and Waiting (2010); Christopher Yuan’s Out of a Far Country (2011); Rosaria Butterfield’s The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert (2012); Gregory Coles’s Single, Gay, Christian (2017); Jackie Hill Perry’s Gay Girl, Good God (2018); David Bennett’s A War of Loves (2018); and Rachel Gilson’s Born Again This Way (2020).

These writers, each in their own style, recount their calling to be followers of Jesus and consider how to live and love faithfully and fruitfully according to the gospel. Together, they set forth a spiritual vision of holiness and righteousness that is relevant for every believer and the whole church.

Another trend is scholars and pastors writing popular-level books in an apologetic mode about marriage and sexuality. This trend includes: Sean McDowell and John Stonestreet’s Same-Sex Marriage (2014), Kevin DeYoung’s What Does the Bible Really Teach about Homosexuality? (2015), Beth Felker Jones’s Faithful (2015), Todd Wilson’s Mere Sexuality (2017), and Preston Sprinkle’s Does the Bible Support Same-Sex Marriage? (2023).

These writers, each with their own approach, answer many of the main arguments marshaled in support of an affirming position on same-sex sexual relationships. Together, they elaborate and defend a theological vision of marriage and sexuality that is true to Scripture and good for the whole church.

Addressing arguments

McLaughlin writes at the confluence of these two trends. Alongside the stories of several friends, she relates vignettes from her personal story of faith and sexuality as a believer who experiences same-sex attraction. Along the way, she weaves these stories with critical examination of claims commonly made in support of same-sex relationships.

In this manner, McLaughlin’s approach is comparable to that taken by Ed Shaw in his excellent book, Same-Sex Attraction and the Church (2015). By the same token, McLaughlin’s book is set against yet another recent trend of books by evangelical writers: those who appeal to their experiences of same-sex attraction to motivate an affirmative case for same-sex relationships. This trend includes Matthew Vines’s God and the Gay Christian (2014) and Karen Keen’s Scripture, Ethics, and the Possibility of Same-Sex Relationships (2018), whose claims and arguments McLaughlin addresses repeatedly within her own book.

McLaughlin has composed her short book in ten chapters, each running about ten pages and addressing one claim commonly made in support of same-sex sexual relationships. Each chapter follows the same format: McLaughlin introduces the chapter with a story that illustrates how and why the claim in question matters to the ordinary lives of real people; she then carefully lays out the affirming argument, considers reasons one might think it a good argument, and explains why she thinks the argument falls short; and finally, she concludes the chapter by tying the theological argument back to the personal story. I’ll elaborate on the opening and closing chapters, which bracket the book and anchor her overall argument.

The first claim addressed is that Christians should just focus on the gospel of God’s love. The assumption behind the claim is that while the gospel is primary for the church, Christians should regard marriage and sexuality as a secondary issue on which they can “agree to disagree.”

McLaughlin affirms the claim but disputes the assumption. As she writes, “rather than being a distraction from the gospel, God’s design for Christian marriage is a pointer to the gospel.” She recounts the Bible’s grand story of God’s love, from God’s design of human marriage in creation (Gen. 1–2) to God’s reunion with humankind in new creation (Rev. 21–22). God’s original design of marriage—man and woman joined into “one flesh”—is both a prototype for human marriage and a picture of God’s covenant: The prophets and apostles depict God as the bridegroom of Israel and Jesus as the bridegroom of the church.

Marriage, ultimately, points to God’s love in Jesus, and male-female difference is essential to marriage as a model of Christ and the church. Accordingly, McLaughlin argues, we must take seriously the biblical prohibitions of sexual relationships outside male-female marriage. As a result, we cannot set aside the question of same-sex relationships as a secondary issue.

The last claim the book addresses is that a God of love cannot be opposed to loving relationships. The assumption behind the claim is that because God is love and “love is love,” God would affirm all varieties of loving relationships—and thus, so should the church.

Again, McLaughlin affirms the claim but disputes the assumption: “The counterpoint to any form of sexual immorality is love. Conversely, any relationship founded on sexual immorality falls short of love.” She cites Jesus, Paul, and John, all of whom clearly and consistently say yes to love in marriage and mandate love of fellow believers, neighbors, and even enemies. Yet with equal clarity and consistency, they say no to sexual immorality in all its variety, including adultery, promiscuity, and same-sex intercourse.

Accordingly, McLaughlin argues, the church should affirm love between brothers and sisters within the Christian family, including believers giving and receiving love in same-sex friendships—but affirm sexual love only within male-female marriage.

In the chapters between, McLaughlin addresses several familiar claims concerning the Bible and same-sex relationships. These include claims about biblical narratives involving same-sex intercourse (Gen. 19), biblical prohibitions of same-sex intercourse (Lev. 18, 20; Rom. 1), biblical terms referring to same-sex intercourse (1 Cor. 6; 1 Tim. 1), and the biblical trajectories concerning slavery and sexuality.

Too many Christians arguing from either side treat such claims, and the related Bible texts, as the place to start the debate and clinch the argument. McLaughlin’s approach puts such claims in their proper place: While necessary to address, they shouldn’t be given the first or last word. Such claims are seen in right perspective when framed within the biblical story of salvation and the biblical picture of marriage woven throughout that story.

A good place to begin

The book’s major strength is that McLaughlin concludes every chapter by bringing the question, and the reader, back to Jesus. She reminds us again and again how the Bible affirms, centrally, that God’s love for us in Jesus is enough for our salvation and abundant life, now and for eternity. Whether we are married or single, our heart’s deepest desire will be fully and finally satisfied in our relationship to Jesus.

The book is not without shortcomings, however. Its major weakness, in my view, is that McLaughlin mentions but does not emphasize procreation in presenting the biblical picture of marriage. This seems an obvious deficiency: Genesis explicitly testifies to God’s procreative purpose in marriage (1:28); Jesus implicitly affirms this purpose as well as the male-female form of marriage (Matt. 22:23–33; Luke 20:27–40)­­­; and the prophets employ procreative imagery in the marital image of God’s covenant (see Ezek. 16).

Granted, emphasizing procreation inevitably prompts sensitive pastoral questions (What about infertility? Contraception? Reproductive technologies?) that cannot be adequately addressed in a short book. Yet we should not avoid discussing the procreative purpose of marriage when debating the question of same-sex relationships for this reason: The increasing acceptance of intentionally nonprocreative marriage among Christians has contributed significantly to shifting opinion within the church toward affirming same-sex relationships.

Still, McLaughlin’s book is commendable, not only for her capable defense of biblical teaching but also for her winsome presentation of that defense. She acknowledges the truths she finds in affirming arguments while avoiding fallacious arguments to make her own case. She refuses to either overstate arguments that favor her own view or to qualify conclusions that she knows will be unpopular with some readers.

Throughout the book, she critiques opposing viewpoints with an irenic tone, showing care and charity for authors with whom she disagrees and for readers who might disagree with her. She respects her readers as reasoners, appealing to experience to preface her examination of each claim but not to drive her arguments or determine her conclusions.

McLaughlin writes in an accessible style that makes this book suitable for a broad range of readers. It would work well for small groups or Sunday school classes, or in high school, college, and seminary classrooms as a supplement to primary course texts.

Regardless of your starting position on questions of sexuality, McLaughlin’s book is a good place to begin examining it in light of Scripture. Every believer and seeker will find something to learn.

Darrin W. Snyder Belousek is the author of Marriage, Scripture, and the Church: Theological Discernment on the Question of Same-Sex Union.

In ‘3 Body Problem,’ Our Days Are Numbered

The Netflix adaptation of an acclaimed Chinese sci-fi series is anxious about time. Christians don’t have to be.

Jess Hong (left) as Jin Cheng and Alex Sharp (right) as Will Downing in 3 Body Problem.

Jess Hong (left) as Jin Cheng and Alex Sharp (right) as Will Downing in 3 Body Problem.

Christianity Today May 23, 2024
Courtesy of Netflix © 2024

Time is running out in Netflix’s 3 Body Problem.

An alien race, the San-Ti, announces that they will arrive on Earth in 400 years. Before they get here, they intend to “kill” science, preventing humanity from developing the technology to wipe them out.

This otherworldly threat precipitates most of the action in the eight-episode TV series, adapted from Chinese author Liu Cixin’s popular book trilogy, Remembrance of Earth’s Past . The show focuses on a group of Oxford scientists who try valiantly to thwart the San-Ti’s devious plan. That includes theoretical physicist Jin Cheng (Jess Hong), who comes up with an outlandish scheme to intercept the San-Ti fleet using the principles of nuclear thermal propulsion.

The characters in 3 Body Problem are desperate to save themselves from impending doom through intellectual innovation and technological prowess. Their frantic race to save humanity brings a common question to the fore: What are we doing with the time we have left?

Our relationship with time is fraught. Time imposes demands and restrictions. Every day, there are deadlines to meet, deals to acquire, and dinners to cook. There isn’t “enough” time to pursue hobbies or dreams.

Compounding these pressures is our culture’s obsession with turning back the clock. Creams and serums tout the erasure of wrinkles and age spots in three to six months. Researchers study ways to extend our life span; some are even striving to reduce one’s biological age.

As we seek to slow time down, we bemoan the speed at which it passes. Vacations feel far too short. Children grow up too fast. Our loved ones pass away sooner than we expect. We turn to “slow living” in the hopes of curbing our impulse toward productivity and self-optimization. But this initiative, with its emphasis on aesthetic morning routines and meandering strolls, may be overly idealistic, privileging those who can afford to cut back on work responsibilities and adopt a more leisurely lifestyle.

In 3 Body Problem, time’s scarcity makes characters intrepid and ambitious; they get their priorities straight. “How will you be remembered?” Ye Wenjie (Rosalind Chao), the Chinese astrophysicist who invites the San-Ti to invade earth because she thinks humanity can’t save itself, asks Jin. “As someone who fought back,” Jin replies. Meanwhile, scientist Auggie Salazar (Eiza González) decides to release her nanofiber technology to the world because “it can make life better for the people who need it most. … It should belong to everybody.”

But living with the threat of impending doom isn’t sustainable. Seeing time as a scarce resource makes us desperate; minutes and hours slip through our fingers. Even the best moments of love and connection are fleeting.

This anxiety-inducing perception of time as finite isn’t the only problem. How we understand the status of human beings can also cause us to think about time wrongly. At first, the San-Ti are curious about our kind. But eventually, they become contemptuous, blasting their judgment onto digital devices and billboards around the world: “You are bugs.”

If bugs are all we are, then there’s no hope for the time we have left. However brave, clever, or loving, we’re ultimately left defeated, bereft of any sort of agency. “They are coming,” Ye declares. No matter what, the aliens will arrive to destroy the world.

In 3 Body Problem, time means everything and nothing to a people that aren’t worth saving. In this eschatology of annihilation, there’s no possibility for change, for goodness to win over evil. Everyone’s simply muddling through, making do with what they have, and waiting for death.

For a people with hope, however, time is not limited but abundant, overflowing into all of eternity. Time is not inconsequential but sacred, moving toward the coming of Jesus. Time is not meaningless but meaningful.

An eschatology of redemption, which defines life for the Christian, invites us to carefully consider the passage of time. We can be transformed into Christlikeness even as we are like a mist that appears for a little while and vanishes (James 4:14). Our days are numbered but significant.

While some of the characters in 3 Body Problem respond to their limited time with ambition or experiments, others choose relationship. Will Downing (Alex Sharp), a physics teacher, has recently learned that he has only months to live, even aside from the aliens. (He has stage IV pancreatic cancer.) As part of physicist Jin’s project, he agrees to send his cryogenically frozen brain into outer space, hoping that the aliens will rebuild him. Will doesn’t make this sacrifice to save humankind. He makes it because he secretly loves Jin.

I’m not condoning Will’s decision to end his life (on earth, at least; in this sci-fi universe, he lives on in space as a “floating brain”). But his choice to give himself up for Jin demonstrates that love is the highest use of our limited days.

Love doesn’t make time stop or slow it down. But love does enlarge our experience of the inexorable passing of days. It turns our attention from the temporal to the eternal. It makes the smallest moments matter—and it keeps the grand sweep of time in view.

Love is what brings Christ, our Savior, to the cross. His love traverses past, present, and future, binding believers across history together as the people of God (1 Pet. 2:9–10), called to live in ways that are pleasing to him, bearing fruit in every good work, and growing in knowledge of him (Col. 1:10).

As people shaped by Christ’s self-sacrificial love, we can’t give in to panicked, fatalistic despair about the days, weeks, or years we have left on this planet, whether we fear an alien apocalypse, a climate disaster, or simply growing old. We don’t need to save ourselves, like the characters in 3 Body Problem.

Instead, we can let love take its time, knowing that it won’t run out for those of us who keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith (Heb. 12:2). We demonstrate this love through small, ordinary actions that say, I am here. I am with you. You are not alone. And, perhaps, this too: You are not a bug.

What does this look like in practice? Canadian author Karen Stiller recounts observing an elderly parishioner walking to receive Communion without being rushed, members of the congregation waiting patiently behind her. “There was the church beautiful in its slower, patient gait for love’s sake alone,” she observed.

“The church can offer this rare gift to its own beloved and beleaguered people, but also to whomever we meet and have the privilege of walking beside and behind for Jesus’ sake.”

The brevity of our lives is neither a problem to solve nor an unavoidable fate we face with resignation. As we confront the wasting away of our bodies, the memories that flicker just out of reach, we can choose to love as Will did—fiercely and unwaveringly. We can choose to slow down, not as a “lifestyle choice” or in denial of death but intentionally, hopefully. We can trust that our time is in our Redeemer’s hands, declaring along the way that, eventually, everything will be made new (Rev. 21:5).

Isabel Ong is the Associate Editor, Asia for Christianity Today.

News

Died: Marshall Allen, Christian Muckraker Who Held the Health Care Industry Accountable

His reporting was marked by a cheerful determination to uncover truth, which friends and coworkers attributed to his faith.

Christianity Today May 22, 2024
Illustration by Christianity Today

Marshall Allen, an investigative journalist who insisted that uncovering truth was fundamental to Christian faith, died on May 19. The 52-year-old suffered a heart attack a few days earlier, according to his former employer ProPublica, one of the world’s leading investigative journalism organizations.

Allen’s unflinching reporting on the US health care industry brought relief to patients and some changes to how hospitals and insurers operate. He said the industry “exploits people’s sickness for profit”—but showing that took intense determination and extended investigations.

For one reporting project on poor hospital care in 2011, he interviewed 250 doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, and patients. The resulting series in the Las Vegas Sun was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, and the Nevada legislature introduced new requirements for hospitals as a result.

In another investigation, Allen reported that Dignity Health, a large religious health system that described itself as carrying on “the healing ministry of Jesus,” had refused to cover the medical expenses of an employee’s three-month-premature baby. Dignity claimed the woman hadn’t filled out the necessary paperwork and that she bore sole responsibility for a nearly $1 million hospital bill, though she had enrolled her baby with the insurer from the NICU.

After Allen called the company with questions, Dignity reversed its decision and retroactively covered the baby, who survived.

“Some people might think that Christians are supposed to be soft and acquiescent rather than muckrakers who hold the powerful to account,” he wrote in The New York Times. “But what I do as an investigative reporter is consistent with what the Bible teaches.”

Allen argued that the Bible “teaches that people are made in the image of God and that each human life holds incredible value.”

A Christian journalist, he said, should be comforted by God to be a comfort to others. A Christian journalist should rebuke deception and unfair practices. A Christian journalist should get all sides of the story, in line with Proverbs’ call for hearing multiple witnesses. And a Christian journalist should admit and correct mistakes with humility. He also shared this vision of Christian journalism in lectures to journalism students at The King’s College.

“He saw this work as redemptive and Christian in nature,” said Paul Glader, a friend of Allen’s and a former journalism professor at King’s. “He did amazing work investigating the health care bureaucracy and bullies, seeking out answers and truth for the little guy—all of us consumers.”

Allen grew up in a Christian family that was thrifty when it came to their own needs and generous with others. He recalled his parents giving lavishly to their local church while refusing to go on big vacations. That thrift allowed Allen to graduate college debt-free, which allowed him to work in ministry and then journalism. It also meant he drove a rusty 2002 Honda Odyssey.

He began his career in youth ministry, working for Young Life. He served three years with the ministry in Nairobi, Kenya. He began to enjoy writing when sending newsletters home from Kenya, his wife, Sonja Allen, told ProPublica.

When Allen and his family returned to the United States, he got a master’s in theology at Fuller Theological Seminary and began writing for Christian outlets, including Christianity Today and Boundless, a Focus on the Family publication.

Allen recalled run-ins with religious editors who objected to investigating Christian leaders.

“He was quite critical of the evangelical press for being too subservient to authority and unwilling to investigate,” according to Glader.

He also had conflicts with a secular editor who doubted whether a Christian could be a good journalist and said the word Christian “as if it were some kind of slur,” he wrote.

He eventually landed at local news outlets in Southern California. He advanced to a job at the Las Vegas Sun, where he first focused his attention on health care. His journalism and publishing colleagues described him as someone with moral clarity, humor, courage, and curiosity.

“He was truly a person like no one else I’ve ever known. He would have been intimidating because of his directness, confidence, and fearlessness except that he wasn’t, because he was so kind and unjudgmental,” said Emily Laber-Warren, director of the Health and Science Reporting program at the City University of New York’s journalism school, where he taught.

Allen also tried to adjust his fellow evangelicals’ view of mainstream journalists. He largely felt that his colleagues embraced his faith.

“I think, sometimes, conservative Christians are completely ignorant about the way the media works. And I also think liberals are completely ignorant about the way the Christian world works, right? There’s so much ignorance on both sides,” he told World Radio.

In addition to journalistic investigations, Allen committed himself to helping fellow journalists, journalism students, and patients caught in the maze of the US health system.

He wrote a how-to book on navigating medical billing called Never Pay the First Bill. The book’s review section on Amazon is filled with people describing how his reporting helped them negotiate bills and get out of medical debt. Author Leah Libresco Sargeant credits his book with helping her resolve a $1,400 bill for her daughter’s care.

“He’s fighting people who systematically profit off of human misery and vulnerability, and it would be easy to let that curdle into contempt,” she told CT. “Instead, he writes generously about people who fight back and never loses his warmth.”

After leaving ProPublica in 2021, Allen wrote a Substack newsletter documenting individual cases of medical billing gone wrong.

Glader, formerly at King’s, said Allen also never took himself too seriously, but had “infectious joy” that countered what could have been discouraging work.

That joy mixed with rigor showed up in stories like the one he did about why eyedrops spill out of people’s eyes. He began by writing that the “good news” was that spilling wasn’t the user’s fault. The “bad news” was that drug companies had designed the drops to be wasteful.

Over the years, Allen wrote about death several times. It was not an anxious topic for him. He saw it as a spur to “love and good deeds,” he said after his father died in 2022.

“I know this sounds dark, but I have a sober appreciation for death,” Allen explained. “Death will bring us all to our knees and test what we believe. One of my favorite Bible verses, Ecclesiastes 7:2, says it’s better to go to a ‘house of mourning’ than it is to celebrate at a ‘house of feasting. For death is the destiny of everyone; the living should take this to heart.’”

“Death is my destiny and it’s also yours. Let’s take that to heart and let it change how we live.”

Allen is survived by his wife, Sonja Allen, a women’s minister at 121 Community Church, and their three sons, Isaac, Ashton, and Cody.

News
Wire Story

Anglican Bishop Removed as Clergy Call for Transparency in Investigation

While the ACNA hasn’t offered public updates on a trial for Stewart Ruch’s abuse response, Todd Atkinson, a bishop appointed to assist him, has been deposed over inappropriate relationships.

Bishop Todd Atkinson

Bishop Todd Atkinson

Christianity Today May 22, 2024
Anglican Network in Canda

Nearly three years ago, Bishop Stewart Ruch of the Anglican Church in North America’s Diocese of the Upper Midwest admitted “regrettable errors” in handling sexual abuse allegations against a lay minister, before taking a leave of absence. An acting bishop took over the diocese and another ACNA bishop, Todd Atkinson, was tapped to assist him.

But Ruch’s absence hasn’t quelled the simmering controversy in the diocese, a sliver of the small, theologically conservative denomination that split from the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada in 2009 over those two denominations’ acceptance of LGBTQ clergy and marriage for same-sex couples.

On Monday, a group of ACNA clergy published an open letter expressing concern that there have not been public updates about a promised church trial for Ruch since November 2023. The letter pushes for regular updates on the trial’s progress and for information about why Ruch has not been inhibited, or limited in his duties, because of his alleged laxity in the past.

On the same day, Atkinson, the assisting bishop, was removed from ordained ministry after a church trial found he had engaged in inappropriate relationships with women and interactions with minors.

Atkinson’s misconduct dates back to at least 2012, six years before he joined ACNA, according to the church court’s order. In 2014, Atkinson began overseeing a Canadian church planting initiative called Via Apostolica that was later grafted into ACNA’s Diocese of the Upper Midwest in 2020. The church court found Monday that Atkinson repeatedly fostered exploitative relationships with multiple women under the guise of being their “spiritual father.”

According to the court order, Atkinson often gave women extravagant personal gifts worth hundreds of dollars, sometimes with funds from accounts maintained by Via Apostolica. Financial reports show that from fall 2013-2014, Atkinson spent more than $10,000 on gifts for pastors and their wives, including the women he behaved inappropriately with, according to the order.

Evidence submitted for the trial shows that Atkinson texted women incessantly, sending one more than 11,000 text messages over four months in 2015. The woman reported that Atkinson attempted to give her a ring and family heirloom without his wife’s knowledge, and after church leaders barred him from communicating with the woman, he had a third party deliver 80 pages of his handwritten journal entries to her.

Part of the evidence for the trial included a 2016 report that found Atkinson had taken part in a “codependent” and “excessive” relationship that had the “appearance of evil,” according to the order. Atkinson reportedly targeted women with a history of trauma or abuse, initiating “father-daughter” relationships with them while acting as their priest, bishop, and counselor.

“The Court finds credible the testimony from multiple witnesses that the Respondent encouraged a culture where his authority was not to be questioned,” the order says. “The Respondent misused spiritual language to excuse and normalize inappropriate behavior, leveraging ecclesiastical authority in order to coerce, control, and exploit women selected from a similar profile.”

The order also found Atkinson had inappropriate interactions with minors. In one instance, the court found, Atkinson invited a 13-year-old girl to get coffee alone and without her parents’ knowledge, and later hosted her alone for a movie night in his basement. The court said Atkinson’s misdeeds were compounded by the fact that he did not disclose any information about prior complaints against him when he applied to join ACNA in 2018.

Andrew Gross, director of communications for ACNA, applauded the work of the church court. “The Court for the Trial of a Bishop, a group of elected volunteers, did an excellent job producing a sound verdict based upon over 2,000 pages of evidence,” he said, adding, “This case is an example of the Anglican Church in North America structures working well in both the investigative and judicial phases of the process.”

While Atkinson was inhibited from all ministry in June 2022 pending the outcome of his investigation, Ruch decided to end his leave and return to his office in October 2022. He has apparently continued to act as bishop of the Diocese of the Upper Midwest as well as rector of the diocesan headquarters, Church of the Resurrection in Wheaton, Illinois.

The letter also suggests there’s been a lack of transparency about the presentments, or church charges, brought against him by three bishops and one grassroots group of congregants in Minnesota.

“We have done our best to outline the issues without attributing intentional malice to provincial actions nor have we presumed the outcome of the trial,” the authors wrote. “Our concern remains the potential harm done through this process, which has been publicly lamented by many of the survivors. We believe that the church can and should do better.”

As of Tuesday evening, the letter had been signed by 46 ACNA clergy.

Two related open letters were also recently published — one by and for ACNA laity echoing the concerns and requests of the clergy letter, and the other signed by 88 clergy and leaders in the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina, requesting that the church court responsible for adjudicating the presentments against Ruch meet promptly and be transparent about the status and timeline of the trial.

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>May 21, 2024

“The fact that Bp. Ruch has not been temporarily inhibited and continues to function in his Diocese and as a member of the College of Bishops in good standing while under two presentments is an affront,” the South Carolina church leaders wrote.

“For too long, our silence has signaled a passive complicity with this travesty.”

Books
Review

The Flannery O’Connor Novel That Might Have Been

Her final work was continually revised but never finished. Can we know what she was aiming to achieve?

Flannery O'Connor at her home in Georgia.

Flannery O'Connor at her home in Georgia.

Christianity Today May 22, 2024
Joe Mctyre / AP Images / Edits by CT

Flannery O’Connor was an inveterate rewriter, working, reworking, and deleting episodes from her stories and novels. Her archives, collected at Georgia College and State University in Milledgeville, bulge with deleted scenes and alternate versions of characters scarcely recognizable as the people who inhabit the published versions of her stories.

Flannery O'Connor's Why Do the Heathen Rage?: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at a Work in Progress

Flannery O'Connor's Why Do the Heathen Rage?: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at a Work in Progress

Baker Pub Group/Baker Books

192 pages

$15.48

O’Connor spent five years crafting Wise Blood, her first novel. It took her seven years to complete a draft of her second novel, The Violent Bear It Away—and it was only 45,000 words long! (In her defense, she was simultaneously producing some of the best short stories ever written.)

When O’Connor died in 1964 at the age of 39, she left behind scraps and pieces of a third novel called Why Do the Heathen Rage?—a dozen or so episodes repetitively, even obsessively rewritten. In the early 1980s, the scholar Marian Burns described these literary oddments as “an untidy jumble of ideas and abortive starts, full scenes written and rewritten many times, several extraneous images, and one fully developed character.”

In the intervening decades, Why Do the Heathen Rage? has been mostly ignored. But in the last few years, author and Pepperdine University professor Jessica Hooten Wilson has dived into that untidy jumble, hoping to make sense of it for the rest of us. The result is Flannery O’Connor’s “Why Do the Heathen Rage?”: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at a Work in Progress, a book that alternates between Wilson’s explanatory essays and scenes from the novel that might have been.

Editorial choices

The manuscripts from O’Connor’s archives totaled 378 typed pages dispersed over 20 file folders, in no particular order. O’Connor left no indication as to which iteration of a scene or character or sentence she considered closest to a “final” version. Nor did she leave any indication as to how the episodes should be sequenced. More to the point, it seems unlikely that O’Connor herself had a good idea what any final version might look like. She very much seems to have been feeling her way through.

Describing her own editorial process, Wilson writes, “My version of these pages comes from intersplicing sentences and paragraphs from the left-behind pages, making editorial choices about which words O’Connor meant to cut or keep, and presuming to show the best of what was left unfinished.” The fact that Wilson boils O’Connor’s 378 manuscript pages down to 60-something pages gives a sense of just how many editorial choices she had to make.

O’Connor indicated in her letters that she conceived Why Do the Heathen Rage? as a sequel or continuation of her short story “The Enduring Chill.” In her novel-in-progress, the protagonist is a version of Asbury from “The Enduring Chill,” though he is now named Walter (except in those fragments where he is named Julian, or Charles, or Asbury).

Walter exchanges letters with a civil rights activist from New York named either Sarah or Oona (again, depending on the fragment), who is either his cousin, his aunt, or a stranger. In his letters, Walter engages in what Wilson calls “epistolary blackface,” posing as a Black man who works for Walter’s family. Things move toward a crisis when Walter realizes that Sarah/Oona is speeding toward him in her convertible and will soon discover that he is not one of the “poor black people of the South,” as she supposes, but an overprivileged, overeducated, overfed slob.

Things move toward a crisis, but they never reach a crisis. There are experimental scenes, false starts, and contradictory character sketches in which O’Connor is clearly trying to get a feel for the story she’s telling and the characters who inhabit it. But the moment before Sarah/Oona’s racial naiveté collides with Walter’s racial cynicism feels like the place where the main trunk of the story is lopped off. From this point, O’Connor is unable to find any way forward. Here is the fundamental narrative problem, and O’Connor died before she solved it.

Any number of factors help explain why O’Connor never finished (indeed, barely started) Why Do the Heathen Rage? A slow writer in any case, she was slowed further by the illness that killed her a few years into the project. She was writing about social and political issues (civil rights, poverty, even euthanasia) much more directly than usual. Furthermore, she was writing for the first time about a protagonist who receives grace early in the story rather than at the end.

After all those spectacular and terrifying conversions in her previous stories, O’Connor was now trying to write about a protagonist who would have to undergo the long, slow business of sanctification. Wilson quotes from a letter O’Connor wrote amid her work on Why Do the Heathen Rage?: “I’ve reached a point where I can’t do again what I know I can do well, and the larger things that I need to do now, I doubt my capacity for doing.”

Wilson makes a convincing case, however, about the greatest difficulty O’Connor might have been confronting. She had written herself into a situation of needing to deal with race and civil rights in a more honest and thoughtful way than she ever had before. She knew that her customary glib and contradictory treatment of race was insufficient for her subject matter, yet she didn’t know how to be less glib or more consistent.

On matters of race, O’Connor was only slowly learning to live (and write) up to her own ideals; she was still growing into her better, more sanctified self. A deeply theological writer, O’Connor nevertheless tended to treat the civil rights movement as a social, political, and cultural matter rather than a theological matter. Wilson writes, “She is trying to write about race as one element of a story about the theological problems that face secular contemplatives and secular social activists. By not reading the issue of race with theological significance—which must include the Black perspective that so often eluded her—O’Connor seems to have been unable to finish the story she longed to tell.”

Acts of imagination

If Black perspectives are absent or elusive in O’Connor’s prose, New Orleans artist Steve Prince offers a corrective in nine haunting and thought-provoking linocut illustrations, and in an afterword commenting on his images.

For her own part, Wilson’s insights into O’Connor’s inner life and cultural milieu are almost as valuable as the work she has done in organizing and editing O’Connor’s manuscript fragments. “This book tells the story of the unfinished manuscript,” writes Wilson. “I consider Flannery as she drafted the novel and what would have influenced her creation of the story: what was she reading, what news stories were making headlines, who was giving speeches on her new television?”

Less valuable is Wilson’s attempt to compose a “potential ending” to Why Do the Heathen Rage? She admits that it is presumptuous to write a final scene for a novel by Flannery O’Connor. Nevertheless, she argues, “all acts of imagination are presumptuous.” That may be, but some acts of imagination are more presumptuous than others.

I must register one other complaint, this one about the cover. A badge on the book jacket proclaims that this is “the unfinished novel in print for the first time.” That is a misleading claim. Calling these fragments an unfinished novel is like calling a pile of Leonardo da Vinci’s pencil studies an unfinished Leonardo painting. I don’t imagine this badge was Wilson’s idea. Its promise of an unfinished novel is neither fair to O’Connor nor true to Wilson’s accomplishment.

O’Connor’s prose accounts for about a third of Flannery O’Connor’s “Why Do the Heathen Rage?” It is prose that O’Connor considered unready for public consumption. I can’t help but look, but I still have misgivings. I had similar misgivings in 2013 when Farrar, Straus and Giroux published a book of private prayer journals O’Connor had written at age 20. (I looked that time too.)

In the prayer journals, as in those first ten stories of her celebrated short story collection (also written during her student days), we see a very young Flannery O’Connor struggling to figure out how to be Flannery O’Connor. In these fragments of Why Do the Heathen Rage? we have a reminder that even when Flannery O’Connor was as mature as she would ever be, she was still struggling to figure out how to be Flannery O’Connor. She struggled every time she sat down to the typewriter. Writers everywhere, take courage.

Jonathan Rogers is the author of The Terrible Speed of Mercy: A Spiritual Biography of Flannery O’Connor. He is the host of The Habit Podcast and the author of The Habit Weekly on Substack.

Be Quick to Listen, Slow to ‘Therapy Speak’

Using terms like trauma, abuse, and toxic too flippantly has consequences for our relationships.

Christianity Today May 22, 2024
Illustration by Mallory Rentsch Tlapek / Source Images: Getty

I was going through a breakup when I started therapy post-pandemic. My friends were telling me that I needed to work on healthier emotional boundaries. They said I was probably experiencing trauma from a toxic ex. Most likely, I’d been in a codependent relationship.

When I went to fill out the intake questionnaire before my first appointment, I regurgitated what I’d heard. I was seeking therapy to “establish healthier emotional boundaries because of a codependent relationship that had left me traumatized.”

But after a few sterile sessions full of the jargon I’d picked up from friends and the internet, I stopped using these terms—trauma, codependence, emotional boundaries. I was using language to distance myself from reality. I was confusing self-preservation for emotional maturity.

It’s not like these words were entirely inaccurate. It’s that they’d become clichés, shorthand that kept me from understanding the nuances of my own experience. I wasn’t undergoing “trauma.” But I was scared of what another romantic relationship would look like and worried about whether it would turn out the same way this one had.

I’m not alone in my use of “therapy speak.” Thanks to social media, terms once confined to clinical settings are ubiquitous in everyday conversations. A difficult roommate is “toxic”; conflict is “abuse”; every ex-boyfriend is a “narcissist”; and stress is always “trauma.” We are all “victims”; we are all “gaslit.”

Sometimes, of course, these words are warranted. With mental illness on the rise, it’s helpful to have common language at our disposal. As more people discuss their mental health, therapy itself is becoming destigmatized. Hearing other Christians talk openly about abuse may be the encouragement a victim needs to come forward. Acknowledging a painful childhood as “traumatic” may free someone to seek professional help.

But all of us, and Christians in particular, should be careful about overrelying on therapy speak to describe our relationships with others. This language has consequences—not only for understanding our own lives rightly but for living together as the body of Christ. How we speak shapes what we do, and therapy speak might be limiting our ability to love our neighbors well.

Overusing therapy speak—or using it out of context—conflates different kinds of difficult experiences. That conflation can be confusing at best and harmful at worst.

Take, for instance, a social media video that came across my feed a few years ago, in which a woman describes skipping a meal as “self-harm.” Of course, this may indicate a pattern of disordered eating. But in many cases, though skipping breakfast is unfortunate, it’s also benign. Classifying one missed meal as self-harm undermines the seriousness of what that term really means.

Then there’s the word trauma. I’ve heard it used to describe a difficult class at school or even an encounter with a centipede in my first apartment (true story). But when trauma becomes a fair characterization of normal conflicts or everyday stresses, its real meaning—“exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury, or sexual violence”—gets minimized.

Using words like toxic and gaslighting as sloppy shorthand for normal conflicts with parents, professors, and friends is dishonest, even when done without ill-intent. It dilutes the meaning of serious words for people who’ve undergone serious suffering.

For example, when abuse describes an argument between roommates, it’s no longer a helpful word for those who’ve experienced real mistreatment, including in the church. For congregations that are reckoning with actual instances of sexual abuse, emotional abuse, or the abuse of authority, it’s especially important to be precise with language. Overusing a word can take away its severity, making light of the heaviness it holds for those walking through dark valleys.

Overusing therapy speak can keep us from hearing each other. It can also give us an excuse to stop listening altogether. It’s hard to argue for reconciliation when a friend deems your relationship “toxic” or “problematic.” Nobody can push back on plans canceled for “self-care.” And “emotional boundaries” just can’t be crossed.

When we use therapy speak to shut down conversations, relationships become dictatorships, with one person wielding terms over another. A me-versus-them dynamic centers ourselves rather than others. I feel unsettled about something you do; because of that, I need space. We seek to minimize any conflict, discomfort, or inconvenience.

This deflection of responsibility discourages both introspection and even honest confession about the ways we fail to love our neighbors. Labeling your friend as a “narcissist” is easier than recognizing the part you play in the dynamic. It’s far easier to set an “emotional boundary” than to sacrifice for someone else, especially when it feels like they’re being annoying or unreasonable.

Of course, sometimes, boundaries are warranted. Sometimes, relationships must end. But cutting people out of our lives should always be done carefully and thoughtfully. Therapy speak can simplify what should be a process of discernment and prayer about our own roles in a relationship into a black-and-white judgment that doesn’t consider others’ complexities, mistakes, and imperfections. My mom remembers a conversation differently; she’s “gaslighting” me, and I won’t speak with her anymore. My emotionally immature colleague didn’t respect my time during a meeting; he’s “toxic,” and not worth the trouble of getting to know.

Our brothers and sisters will annoy us, hurt us, and misunderstand us. Sometimes, this will require a private conversation to clear the air (Matt. 18:15), but often won’t warrant estrangement—or wielding these words as weapons.

God doesn’t promise perfect relationships, and we should be asking the Lord to search our hearts, to identify the planks in our own eyes (Matt. 7:5). We need to be honest about “any offensive way” within instead of assuming ourselves to be the victim (Ps. 139:23–24).

Unquestioning validation” from those around us feels great in the short term. Distancing ourselves from those who have offended us is easy and can even be misconstrued as accountability or justice. But these relational quick fixes aren’t helpful in the long run—especially if what we want is real Christian community.

For Christians, that community is eternal. It’s also messy. In Life Together, Dietrich Bonhoeffer recognized that through hard relationships, we realize how much we need God’s grace: “Thus the very hour of disillusionment with my brother becomes incomparably salutary, because it so thoroughly teaches me that neither of us can ever live by our own words and deeds, but only by that one Word and Deed which really binds us together—the forgiveness of sins in Jesus Christ.”

Therapy speak just might be making us less patient, less kind, and less generous, slower to forgive and quicker to anger. Our culture too easily tosses people aside over difficulties that are converted into trauma or toxicity. We limit the fruit that comes from living together. We turn sacrificial love into a burden.

This is an opportunity for Christians to be countercultural—not by promoting unhealthy relationships, closing down conversations about mental health, or rejecting the insights that therapy provides, but simply by using our words carefully and by seeing people beyond the labels we ascribe to them.

After settling into therapy, I found the slow (and oftentimes ugly) practice of expanding on my emotions to be a fruitful one. My therapist helps translate what I am saying into the terms that make sense for each situation. To be honest, sometimes I just need help figuring out strategies for conflict resolution. My therapist often reminds me that “it takes two to tango”; she confronts me thoughtfully and straightforwardly about how I might be misrepresenting someone else. Our process together has shown me how important it is to have a good support system—a system that can “carry each other’s burdens” (Gal. 6:2) with patience and grace.

Mia Staub is editorial project manager at Christianity Today.

News
Wire Story

DOJ Issues First Indictment in Southern Baptist Investigation

A former official at Southwestern Seminary has been charged with falsifying records in the federal probe into the denomination’s abuse response.

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth

Christianity Today May 21, 2024
Michael-David Bradford / Creative Commons

A former Southern Baptist seminary professor and interim provost has been indicted on a charge of obstructing justice in a sexual misconduct case, the Department of Justice announced Tuesday.

Matt Queen, who was previously an administrator and professor at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, allegedly gave the FBI falsified notes during an ongoing investigation into alleged sexual misconduct at the seminary, which is in Fort Worth. He was arraigned Tuesday, according to the DOJ.

“As alleged, Matthew Queen attempted to interfere with a federal grand jury investigation by creating false notes in an attempt to corroborate his own lies,” said US Attorney Damian Williams of the Southern District of New York in a statement. “The criminal obstruction charge announced today should exemplify the seriousness of attempts by any individual to manipulate or interfere with a federal investigation.”

Queen, who was named pastor of Friendly Avenue Baptist Church in Greensboro, North Carolina, earlier this year, could not be reached for comment.

The indictment is the first official acknowledgment by the DOJ of an investigation into the Southern Baptist Convention and its entities. Southern Baptist leaders announced in 2022 that they had been subpoenaed by the Department of Justice and promised to cooperate.

News of the DOJ investigation followed the release of a report from Guidepost Solutions showing that SBC leaders had mistreated abuse survivors for years, denied responsibility for the actions of local churches and downplayed the number of sexual abuse cases in the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.

Earlier this year, the SBC’s Executive Committee announced the DOJ’s investigation into the committee was ended, leading to confusion. The Executive Committee later issued a statement saying the DOJ’s investigation into the SBC and its entities remained open.

In a statement Tuesday, the DOJ gave more details about the investigation.

“Since approximately 2022, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (‘US Attorney’s Office’) and the FBI have been investigating allegations of sexual abuse and misconduct related to a national religious denomination (the ‘Denomination’) and its affiliated entities, and the alleged cover-up of such allegations by individuals and entities associated with the Denomination,” according to a statement.

As part of that investigation, Southwestern was required to give any documents about abuse to the FBI. However, according to the DOJ, a seminary official received a report of alleged sexual abuse by a student in the fall of 2022. That alleged abuse was reported to the school’s campus police, though not to the FBI, but no other action was taken.

A Southwestern staffer, referred to as “Employee-1” by the DOJ, was later told by a Southwestern leader (Employee-2) to destroy a document about the incident and the seminary’s inaction, according to the DOJ. Queen was allegedly in the room with Employee-1 when this happened, but allegedly told the FBI in an interview that he had not heard Employee-2 say to destroy the report.

He subsequently produced a set of fake notes from the meeting, the DOJ alleges, which he presented to the FBI in June 2023—but he gave conflicting stories about when the notes were written, later admitting the notes were fake.

Matt Queen in a video for Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in November 2022.
Matt Queen in a video for Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in November 2022.

“On June 21, 2023, MATTHEW QUEEN testified under oath that he had in fact heard Employee-2 direct Employee-1 to make the Document ‘go away,’” according to the DOJ.

The 49-year-old Queen could face up to 20 years in prison after being charged with one count of falsification of records.

“Matthew Queen, an interim Provost, allegedly failed to inform the FBI of a conspiracy to destroy evidence related to the ongoing investigation of sexual misconduct and instead produced falsified notes to investigators. Queen’s alleged actions deliberately violated a court order and delayed justice for the sexual abuse victims,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge James Smith in a statement. “The FBI will never tolerate those who intentionally lie and mislead our investigation in an attempt to conceal their malicious behavior.”

In a statement, Southwestern said the student involved in the alleged abuse was suspended and later withdrew from the school. The seminary also stated it reported the matter to the DOJ as it was required to do.

The school said the alleged actions described in the indictment were “antithetical to the values of the seminary.”

“After the seminary learned of Queen’s actions in June 2023, he was immediately placed on administrative leave and resigned as interim provost,” the school said in the statement. “All employees alleged to have acted improperly in this matter are no longer employed by the seminary.”

Southwestern, once one of the nation’s largest seminaries, has fallen on hard times in recent years. Last year a report from the school’s leaders detailed years of financial mismanagement, including overspending its budget by $140 million over 20 years. The school’s former president, who left in the fall of 2022, is suing the school for defamation.

The school also settled a lawsuit in 2023 with a victim of Paul Pressler, a legendary SBC leader, and in 2021, sued to regain control of a Texas foundation that had been taken over by former staffers, who allegedly tried to divert money away from the seminary.

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