Christianity Today (CT) magazine has rejected a $10 million buy-out offer from Canon Press, a publishing company founded by prominent Christian nationalist pastor Doug Wilson.
News of the offer was posted online Sept. 29 by Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham, who claimed that many Christians lament that CT “has been captured by worldly ideology.” Basham suggested Canon Press would restore the magazine to the “intended purpose” of its founder, the Rev. Billy Graham.
Basham also posted an offer letter by Canon, stating that recently assassinated conservative activist Charlies Kirk “carried the torch” of Billy Graham, who died in 2018 at the age of 99. The letter claimed Canon could grow CT to “reach a larger audience and increase its impact, all while preserving that legacy.”
Canon Press, which has published more than 100 books by Wilson and his family members, was originally founded in 1988 as a ministry of Wilson’s Christ Church, in Moscow, Idaho. In 2012, Canon was sold to a for-profit LLC owned by Wilson’s son, N.D. Wilson, and Moscow businessman, Aaron Rench. However, Doug Wilson is also listed as a member of the LLC on its latest annual report.
In response to The Roys Report’s (TRR) inquiry about Canon’s offer, CT Interim President and CEO Thomas Addington replied in an email: “We recently received an unsolicited offer by a third party to purchase Christianity Today. Christianity Today is not for sale and has never been for sale.”
Your tax-deductible gift supports our mission of reporting the truth and restoring the church. Donate $50 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you can elect to receive “Gods of the Smoke Machine” by Scott Latta, click here.
Often regarded as the flagship evangelical magazine, CT was founded in 1956. It has a print circulation of 110,000 and claims to reach 4.5 million Christian leaders every month through its websites, podcasts, and print publications.
Recently, its CEO since 2019, Tim Dalrymple, left the publication to become president of the John Templeton Foundation. Russell Moore, former president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, serves as CT’s editor-in-chief. And longtime WORLD editor Marvin Olasky is CT’s executive editor.
According to its latest IRS 990 filing, CT has nearly $10 million in net assets and generated more than $18 million in revenue in 2023.
However, in an article published Monday, Basham took issue with just over $1 million of funding to CT from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation over a four-year period ending this year. The Hewletts also fund major abortion provider Planned Parenthood.
The magazine received $400,000 from the foundation in 2025 for general operating support; $75,000 in 2024 for development of a mobile app; and $200,000 in 2022, 2023, and 2024 for U.S. election reporting.
On its website, Hewlett states that with all its media grants, “the foundation takes a hands-off approach and exercises no editorial control.”
But Basham—author of the controversial book, Shepherds for Sale, claiming that leftists have co-opted evangelicals by funding their organizations—challenged CT’s editorial independence.
In her article, she claimed that Hewlett’s funding undermined CT’s traditional pro-life stance. And she linked to a CT interview in which Jonathan Liedle of the National Catholic Register argues that the goal of the pro-life movement shouldn’t just be to “prohibit abortion.” Instead, pro-lifers should promote public policy that honors the dignity of all people—whether it be the unborn or the immigrant.
By doing this, Liedle said pro-life advocates help to ensure that “no woman feels she has to choose between the life of her child and her own economic security or personal safety.”
However, to Basham, this article and others promoting a “whole life” perspective were a sign that CT is weakening its pro-life stance.
“Many pro-life activists have warned that expanding the definition of ‘pro-life in this way minimizes the unique horror of killing preborn babies,” Basham writes. She also quotes Seth Gruber of the White Rose Resistance, who claims, “The Left have taken huge advantage of this redefinition in order to smuggle in radical socialist priorities, all under the label of ‘pro-life.’”
In response to Basham’s article, Addington wrote, “Nothing Hewlett funded for Christianity Today had connection to our Evangelical pro-life convictions. Neither has there been any attempt by Hewlett or any other granting agency to influence our pro-life reporting.
“Christianity Today believes and supports a conservative Evangelical pro-life stance. We would never take funding from any individual or organization that asked us to modify that position.”
Julie Roys is a veteran investigative reporter and founder of The Roys Report. She also previously hosted a national talk show on the Moody Radio Network, called Up for Debate, and has worked as a TV reporter for a CBS affiliate. Her articles have appeared in numerous periodicals.
English 
Spanish 
33 Responses
There was a time in the 1980’s when Christianity Today appeared to have a distinct right wing bias. Today it stands as an honest Christian voice, when right wing propaganda has made major inroads in the Church. We need to hear biblical voices like Christianity Today, and not just left or right. And to be sure, Roys Report is an important voice for truth-telling.
When CT is publishing articles that legitamize homosexuality, then no, they are not an honest Christian Voice. Russell Moore is about as Woke as they come and he has never met a Progressive view he didn’t like. What we need to hear from CT is sound biblical orthodox doctrine and theology, not wordly tripe that works to normalize and accept sin.
Can you provide links to the articles you refer to?
Woke doesn’t mean what you think it does…..
Most of the people who oppose being ‘Woke’ cannot clearly define what it means or they have it mean what they want it to mean……or in the words of Humpty Dumpty…..
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
Because Christianity is inherently, by its precepts, right wing (conservative.)
If it is no longer conservative today, it is far less Christian today.
This isn’t true. There are plenty of Christian precepts (distributing wealth, speaking up for the marginalized) that are deemed “left”.
But perhaps what’s most important is that we stop trying to make our faith align with any man-made “wing” or political party that changes its platforms, positions, and messaging based on what will get them elected.
Our faith should stand alone.
Christianity, at its core, is not inherently aligned with either conservative or liberal ideology. Throughout history, Christian beliefs and practices have inspired diverse social and political movements across the spectrum. The teachings of Jesus, the early church, and the variety of Christian traditions emphasize values that can resonate with people of differing convictions. It’s important to recognize that the faith transcends partisan boundaries and calls for thoughtful discernment in every era.
Good for CT. Connecting with Wilson in any way would put CT into polictical hole. Then CT would lose all credibilty as a voice for evagelical Christianty, inline with Billy Graham’s goal for the magazine.
They are already in a political hole, a left wing one. One survey found out of 70 political donations made by CT staff, all went to Democrats, the party of abortion. Ridiculous
Shepherds for Sale is a great book.
The republican party is also pro-choice. They say they’re pro-life, but their actions say the opposite.
Bashen’s book is full of errors, claims with out documentation, and the like. But then I suppose you also watched and believed Dinesh D’Souza about the 2020 election.
ABORTION dogwhistle also in play…
Thank goodness. Outlets like CT and the Roys Report help keep the light shining in the shadows behind the pulpit
I am so grateful they have held their integrity. Although, I don’t understand why the tangent on Pro-life was necessary in this article. It’s seems to want to lead the reader to assume CT had a moral decline. I have always felt J.R. aligns with CT.
I really appreciate their more nuanced view on pro life, while not forfeiting biblical values.
I included the pro-life information because Basham used it in her article Monday to argue that CT had moved left. I wanted to inform readers of what CT actually published so they can decide for themselves.
If Wilson wants to throw $10M to claim a trophy brand, why not let him? If you think it’s worth more, ask for more.
I get that he’s just going to turn it into an Epoch Times rival for conspiratorial nonsense. But use the man’s vanity to do some good? The money could endow the the same editorial staff under a new masthead, and even maybe grow it a bit.
Or maybe just close it down.
Between 2015 and 2022, 9 employees at Christianity Today made a total of 73 political donations, all of which were directed to Democratic candidates or causes.
This includes Timothy Dalrymple, the magazine’s President and CEO, who contributed $300 in two separate payments to Sarah Riggs Amico, a failed Georgia Senate candidate whose platform supports abortion rights without exception and repealing the Hyde Amendment.
Other staff members included Natalie Lederhouse, Vice President of Advertising and Partnerships, who donated $50 to the 2020 Biden Victory Fund , and Daniel Silliman, the news editor, who made eight donations between October 2019 and November 2020 to pro-abortion and pro-LGBTQ candidates, including Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign.
Emily Lund, who served as assistant editor and editorial resident, donated to the Democratic National Committee during her tenure.
The Federal Election Commission has no records of any Christianity Today executive giving to the Republican Party since 1991.
These findings have led critics to argue that the magazine’s leadership and staff are out of step with the conservative views of the majority of evangelicals.
If any employees are making individual contributions on behalf of only themselves, that’s their right to do so. What matters in the end is that what they write, edit and print as CT employees is in step with Biblical CHRISTIANITY, not in support of a political party or in step with how its readers vote. Because last I checked, CT stands for “Christianity Today” and not “Conservativism Today”.
And BTW, there was a point in time when the majority of southern evangelicals were in favor of segregation….should CT have supported that too, because “it was in step with the view of the majority”?
Are we looking for a publication that merely prints whatever confirms our beliefs? Or one that prints BIBLICAL information, even if it challenges what we believe?
Perhaps I missed the point of CT….
Truth is stranger than fiction, or so they say. Here’s a trifecta of favorite characters all in one article: Wilson, Moore and Basham, plus Kirk and Olasky as bonuses. [Full disclosure — I’m a CT subscriber.] Gotta admire Basham for scooping the story, though she, as always, begins with facts (the offer document) and proceeds to imply causation rather than correlation. Thanks for making my day!
Christianity Today is not unbiased at all. Please reconsider your assumptions. I personally don’t want to see any political representation in faith publications. CT does not meet that requirement. It fails miserably.
You, Christian, may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you.
Putting your head in the sand is not a solution.
There’s a difference between politics and “political representation”. I’m all for “the Bible and the Ballot” discussions that guide us in discussing political matters and public policy from a Biblical perspective.
I’m NOT for political representation in the form of saying or implying that only “real Christians” vote for a specific party/candidate or the endorsement of any specific candidates or parties – Republican, Democrat, or other.
My head is not in the sand, brother. Don’t make silly assumptions, it degrades your cred . I stated what I stated, that is enough to argue from if you want. Unity for believers is strength, division is weakness. There are those who want to keep us all divided with fascinating us with woke this and Nationalist that, and it’s working, at least for now. CT and TRR and many others are politics-forward which they feel is the way to bring change, but the reverse is true.
The battle of two beasts–a woke apostate current leadership vs. a sleazy, creepy patriarchal contender… I’ll grab the popcorn and stay out of this!
There’s very little difference between Wilson and the Taliban. The only difference is in branding.
This rejection was expected, and the offer was intended to make a targeted point.
Everyone knew that.
Women like Megan Basham who work for these ultra right-wing organizations are like useful idiots. If the Christian Nationalists like Doug Wilson would have their way, she would lose her right to vote. She would also be told by the likes of others just like Wilson, that her place is strictly in the home. It boggles my mind that these women work against their own best interests.
If CT caved into Wilson’s offer I can guess the following would happen.
1. Many of the editors and writers would be fired and replaced with those that align with Wilson’s Dominionism
2. The magazine might change it’s name
3. Many present subscribers would unsubscribe.
4. Billy Graham’s vision (Within the context of what was known as neo-evangelicalism) for the magazine would be lost.
I was once a frequent reader of CT and subscriber. The magazine changed around the time Trump took office (’16, ’17). Don’t want to go so far as to call it left-leaning, but I did notice they started to produce and frame articles seemingly more sympathetic to progressive issues (especially on identity, race, and gender) that didn’t seem to be there before. I guess that was to be expected considering how the writers and editors were no big fans of Trump and were probably shocked that he won. And I’m sure they’re subscriber base these days is majority anti-MAGA. Selling to Wilson is a terrible idea, but they could probably stand to hire at least one or two evangelical figures not overly critical of Trump to counteract Russell Moore and maybe win back old subscribers.
I have subscribed to CT for over 30 years. In the beginning they were considered conservative. Now they are considered liberal. My take is they are right where they always were, centrist evangelical, but white evangelical culture has moved so far to the right that positions like “being prolife means caring about the poor and the immigrant as well as the unborn” or pointing out racism exists in Christian circles are now cited as proof that the publication has gone “woke.” I thank God they didn’t allow Doug Wilson to buy them. I didn’t see them mention this on their website so thank you Roys Report for the info!
It is important CT remains as is. It is one of the few Evangelical publications that would dare question Trump or the Right.
Not certain what happened to the U.S White Evangelical church, but it reminds me of the large White Southern denominations during the 1850s……..