All Roads Lead to Rome

The Catholic Church saw incredible growth in the United States this past year, especially among young people (men, in particular). If you're tuned into the online discourse about this trend, you'll be familiar with the tradition-oriented, conservative kind of Catholic who might look down his nose at new, inexperienced converts or those who aren't as orthodox in their faith. There is nothing wrong with a preference for tradition and the piety that often goes with it. In fact, I would say Catholics the world over would do well to be more reverent. But, at the same time, the Church is and ought to be a home for all. It is, of course, a hospital for sinners. That's what makes Melanie McDonagh's new book, Converts: From Oscar Wilde to Muriel Spark, Why So Many Became Catholic in the 20th Century, a worthwhile read.

The post All Roads Lead to Rome appeared first on .

‘Emergency In The Church’: Catholic Leaders Decry Vatican Report That Pushes Homosexuality

Father Gerald Murray called the 'Vatican-sponsored' report a 'full-fledged endorsement of the homosexual lifestyle.'
Trump Vs. Pope Leo, the Real Threat of Ai & Fraying Social Fabric | Bishop Robert Barron
play icon

Trump Vs. Pope Leo, the Real Threat of Ai & Fraying Social Fabric | Bishop Robert Barron

ACLU fights archangel Michael statue honoring cops — but court might not normalize 'heckler's veto'



A Massachusetts city in the Greater Boston area commissioned a pair of 10-foot-tall bronze statues heavy with cultural and historical significance to honor police and firefighters outside its new public safety headquarters.

Since the statues also carry religious significance — one depicts the winged archangel Michael stepping on the head of a demon, and the other depicts Florian, a third-century firefighting Roman Christian — the American Civil Liberties Union and a handful of secularizing activist groups joined local thin-skinned critics in suing to block the installation last May.

According to the ACLU, having the two statues as the sole adornments on the building's facade "would undermine religious pluralism in Quincy and violate the Massachusetts Constitution’s long-standing requirement that the government remain neutral in matters of religion."

'Let Quincy pay tribute to its firefighters and police.'

The ensuing legal battle has reached the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which heard oral arguments on Wednesday in the case Fitzmaurice v. City of Quincy.

The defendants' thesis, as outlined in their opening brief to the court, is that symbolism on government property should not become "illegal simply because some citizens perceive it to have religious meaning."

Some of the court's justices, Democrat-appointee Gabrielle Wolohojian in particular, did not appear to be entirely buying what the attorney for the city from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty was selling at the outset despite considering his arguments in a city already replete with public art evoking persons, symbols, and themes of religious significance, including multiple statues of Moses.

RELATED: Young men flocking to Christianity in record numbers

Education Images/Universal Images Group/Getty Image

The court proved particularly fixated on whether Florian and Michael's special recognition as saints by the Catholic Church was actually an issue in this case and raised as possibly relevant in a lower court's insinuation that the statues' primary champion, Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch, was untrustworthy and had worked clandestinely to get the statues funded and installed.

The court was not, however, overly receptive to the ACLU's arguments in favor of denying Quincy first responders their statues, which have been defended in recent months by a plethora of organizations, including the nation’s largest firefighter and police unions, various faith groups, and esteemed constitutional scholars.

One justice questioned whether:

  • such legal concern-mongering constitutes a "heckler's veto" that is here at risk of being normalized;
  • the plaintiffs were effectively asking the state's high court to "provide less protection than the Supreme Court on free exercise," or "allow more hostility to religion than the Supreme Court would tolerate"; and
  • the statues endorsed a particular religion — an especially dubious claim given Florian's secular, historical significance and the archangel Michael's significance in multiple distinct faiths as well as in popular culture and literature.

Tom Bowes, president of Quincy's Firefighters Local 792, said in a statement, "For generations, Florian’s legacy has inspired the brave men and women who run toward danger when others need help. We hope the court allows Quincy to honor that tradition and the first responders who live it every day."

Joseph Davis, senior counsel at Becket and an attorney for the city, said, "In this country, public art doesn't become off-limits just because it may make some people think about religion. We’re confident the justices will apply that commonsense rule here and let Quincy pay tribute to its firefighters and police."

Eric Rassbach, another attorney at Becket, said in the wake of the hearing on Wednesday that the ACLU's argument largely "relied on the supposedly dead legal standard known as the Lemon test, which SCOTUS abrogated."

"For decades, the unusuable Lemon test produced confusion and split decisions in cases involving religious symbols," continued Rassbach. "That changed in 2019, when SCOTUS ruled 7-2 in [American Legion v. American Humanist Association] that the First Amendment does not require removing a WWI memorial cross and made clear that Lemon no longer applies."

While the Supreme Court rejected the relevance of the test articulated by SCOTUS in its 1971 Lemon v. Kurtzman ruling as a way of guiding the court in identifying Establishment Clause violations, Norfolk Superior Court Judge William Sullivan previously leaned heavily on it in the Quincy case.

"It would be a bizarre move for Massachusetts to revive a test that failed so badly at the federal level, especially since Lemon has no grounding in the Commonwealth’s Constitution," wrote Rassbach. "That document takes a different approach: It recognizes the vital role of religion in public life while guaranteeing equal protection for all religious denominations. That’s a far cry from forcing cities to scrub anything that smacks of the religious from all public property."

The court is expected to deliver its decision sometime this fall.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pope responds after repeated attacks by Trump over war criticism: 'I have no fear'



President Donald Trump has in recent days lambasted several influential critics of the U.S.-Israeli military actions in and around Iran, including long-time supporters Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, and Alex Jones.

Shortly before sharing an AI image on Truth Social on Sunday depicting himself dressed in messianic garb and healing a sick man, Trump posted another tirade, this time targeting Pope Leo XIV — the spiritual father of over 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide, including Vice President JD Vance and roughly 20% of Americans — over Leo's anti-war remarks.

'I'm not a big fan of Pope Leo.'

"Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy. He talks about 'fear' of the Trump Administration, but doesn’t mention the FEAR that the Catholic Church, and all other Christian Organizations, had during COVID when they were arresting priests, ministers, and everybody else, for holding Church Services, even when going outside, and being ten and even twenty feet apart," wrote Trump. "I like his brother Louis much better than I like him, because Louis is all MAGA. He gets it, and Leo doesn’t!"

Trump noted further that he doesn't:

want a Pope who thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon. I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s terrible that America attacked Venezuela, a Country that was sending massive amounts of Drugs into the United States and, even worse, emptying their prisons, including murderers, drug dealers, and killers, into our Country. And I don’t want a Pope who criticizes the President of the United States because I’m doing exactly what I was elected, IN A LANDSLIDE, to do, setting Record Low Numbers in Crime, and creating the Greatest Stock Market in History.

Pope Leo, whose Petrine ministry began in May 2025, has long advocated for victims of war, particularly children, and urged world leaders and followers of Christ to pursue peaceful resolutions.

RELATED: Catholic churches PACKED for Easter as conversions skyrocket

Simone Risoluti/Vatican Media/Vatican Pool/Getty Images

During a prayer vigil for peace at Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome on Saturday, for instance, the pope highlighted the condemnations of war voiced by two of his predecessors — Pope John Paul II against the Iraq War and Pope Paul VI against the conflict of his age in 1965 — then noted:

Prayer teaches us how to act. In prayer, our limited human possibilities are joined to the infinite possibilities of God. Thoughts, words, and deeds then break the demonic cycle of evil and are placed at the service of the Kingdom of God. A Kingdom in which there is no sword, no drone, no vengeance, no trivialization of evil, no unjust profit, but only dignity, understanding, and forgiveness. It is here that we find a bulwark against that delusion of omnipotence that surrounds us and is becoming increasingly unpredictable and aggressive. The balance within the human family has been severely destabilized. Even the holy Name of God, the God of life, is being dragged into discourses of death. A world of brothers and sisters with one heavenly Father vanishes, as in a nightmare, giving way to a reality populated by enemies.

A day earlier, the pope's X account shared the following message, which was met with widespread criticism: "God does not bless any conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs."

'I do not think the message of the gospel should be abused as some are doing.'

Such comments apparently got under Trump's skin.

After claiming that Leo was elected pope only "because he was an American, and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump," the president said, "Leo should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical Left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician. It’s hurting him very badly and, more importantly, it’s hurting the Catholic Church!"

In addition to criticizing the pope on social media, Trump told reporters, "We don't like a pope that's going to say that it's OK to have a nuclear weapon. We don't want a pope that says crime is OK in our cities. I don't like it. I'm not a big fan of Pope Leo. He's a very liberal person, and he's a man that doesn't believe in stopping crime."

Pope Leo responded to Trump's critiques during a flight to Algeria, noting that he does not regard his "role as that of a politician."

"I am not a politician, and I do not want to enter into a debate with him," said the pope. "I do not think the message of the gospel should be abused as some are doing. I continue to speak strongly against war, seeking to promote peace, dialogue, and multilateralism among states to find solutions to problems. Too many people are suffering today, too many innocent lives have been lost, and I believe someone must stand up and say there is a better way."

'It is the Pope’s prerogative to articulate Catholic doctrine and the principles that govern the moral life.'

After noting that he urges all world leaders, not just Trump, to "promote peace and reconciliation," Pope Leo underscored, "I have no fear of the Trump administration or speaking out loudly of the message of the gospel, which is what I believe I am here to do, what the Church is here to do."

"We don’t deal with foreign policy with the same perspective he might understand it, but I do believe in the message of the gospel, as a peacemaker," added the pope.

Bishop Robert Barron, whom Trump appointed to his Commission on Religious Liberty last year, stressed on Monday that the president's remarks about the pope "were entirely inappropriate and disrespectful."

"It is the Pope’s prerogative to articulate Catholic doctrine and the principles that govern the moral life. In regard to the concrete application of those principles, people of good will can and do disagree," wrote Barron. "I would warmly recommend that serious Catholics within the Trump administration — Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio, Vice President Vance, Ambassador Brian Burch, and others — might meet with Vatican officials so that a real dialogue can take place. This is far preferable to the statements on social media."

Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, stated, "I am disheartened that the President chose to write such disparaging words about the Holy Father. Pope Leo is not his rival; nor is the Pope a politician. He is the Vicar of Christ who speaks from the truth of the Gospel and for the care of souls."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

How Saying No To IVF Is Saying Yes To Fruitfulness

Leigh Snead’s recent book, 'Infertile but Fruitful,' provides a powerful Christian example for women struggling with infertility.

G.K. Chesterton Blazed A Journalistic Trail Worth Following

Our mission is to cultivate swordsmanship of the pen as we train the next generation of jolly journalists, whose vision for society flows from a Chestertonian spirit of gratitude and wonder.

Did Bibi Netanyahu just insult Jesus? Allie Beth Stuckey sets the record straight



Benjamin Netanyahu has recently come under fire for his comments comparing Jesus Christ to Genghis Khan at a recent press conference — but like most clips that go viral, it doesn’t tell the full story.

“Unfortunately and unhappily, Jesus Christ has no advantage over Genghis Khan because if you are strong enough, ruthless enough, powerful enough, evil will overcome good, aggression will overcome moderation,” Netanyahu said.

“So you have no choice. If you look at the world as it is today, you have to be blind not to see that the democracies led by the United States have to reassert their will to defend themselves,” he added.

While many conservatives were in an uproar after hearing Netanyahu's comments, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey believes that some nuance and context are required in order to understand what he meant.


“He’s quoting an American historian, Will Durant, he was a Catholic. He turned into an agnostic as an adult. And his 1968 book, you see that actually at the beginning of the full clip, that he is quoting this book called ‘The Lessons of History,’” Stuckey says, before reading the full clip.

“Nature and history do not agree with our conceptions of good and bad; they define good as that which survives, and bad as that which goes under; and the universe has no prejudice in favor of Christ as against Genghis Khan,” Durant wrote.

Netanyahu later clarified on X that the outrage was “fake news” regarding his “attitude toward Christians” and that he “did not denigrate Jesus Christ.”

“A morally superior civilization may still fall to a ruthless enemy if it does not have the power to defend itself. No offense was meant,” the prime minister added in another post.

“Now I disagree that he is insulting Jesus Christ here. He actually seems to me to be making an effort to caveat what he’s saying, that unfortunately he says, unhappily, it’s not the way of Jesus that wins wars,” Stuckey says.

“However, it was also an unfortunate way to make his point because the quote, I think, is a misunderstanding of the Christian worldview. We do serve a Jesus who tells us, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers, blessed are the meek, blessed are the poor in spirit,’” she continues.

“The characteristics of the Christian life are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, self-control. But there is also the just war theory that Christian thinkers over time have taught that asserts that there are good reasons to wield violence in defense of the innocent against the wicked,” she adds.

Stuckey points out that in the Old Testament, there was a demand for war and violence by God.

“I’m not saying that the Old Testament is a justification for America’s wars,” Stuckey says, adding, “It is to say and to point out that one cannot state that in principle God is always against war and violence.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Ditch The Leprechauns And Read The Real Story Of St. Patrick’s Day

Now, more than ever, we need to put the Saint back into St. Patrick’s Day!

Bernard Nathanson: Abortion architect who found mercy in Christ



Bernard Nathanson died nearly 15 years ago. His story matters now more than ever. Not because he was famous, though he was. Not because he was influential, though few Americans shaped the culture more profoundly. His story matters because it proves that no one is beyond redemption — and that truth has a way of breaking through, no matter how determined we are to suppress it.

Nathanson was born in New York to Jewish parents. He became an obstetrician and gynecologist like his father. But unlike his father, he devoted his career to ending pregnancies rather than delivering babies. At one point, he directed the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health, then the largest abortion facility in the world. He later claimed responsibility for more than 75,000 abortions. Among them was his own child.

Our age desperately needs this kind of conversion — the courage to admit complicity and the humility to seek forgiveness.

He wasn’t merely performing abortions. In many ways, he helped build the movement that made them legal. Nathanson was among the central activists whose efforts culminated in Roe v. Wade. Today, nearly 30% of American pregnancies are unintended; about 40% of those end in abortion — roughly 1,500 to 2,500 each day, between 550,000 and 910,000 annually. Those numbers cast a long shadow over Nathanson’s legacy.

By his own account, he was an atheist. He married four times. He lived without God and, for a time, without guilt.

Then came the ultrasound.

Signs of life

In the 1970s, advances in medical imaging made it possible to view the womb in real time. For the first time, doctors could watch a living fetus during an abortion procedure. Nathanson asked a colleague who performed 15 to 20 abortions daily to record one on ultrasound. What they saw unsettled him permanently.

“Ultrasound opened up a new world,” Nathanson later wrote. “For the first time I could really see the human fetus, measure it, observe it, watch it, and indeed bond with it and love it.”

This was his first conversion — not religious, but moral. Fetal development was no longer a medical abstraction. It was human life unfolding along a continuous path. To interrupt that life became, in his words, intolerable.

He went farther. He called abortion a crime. He did not exempt himself. He knew he had not been a bystander but a central participant. The reckoning was unavoidable.

No looking away

In 1984, he directed "The Silent Scream," a film featuring ultrasound footage of an abortion in progress. It removed abstraction. What had been hidden behind euphemism became visible. The film galvanized pro-life movements worldwide because it forced viewers to see what had long been described away.

Nathanson became the abortion movement’s most formidable opponent precisely because he had once been its architect. He understood its language and its strategy. He knew how clinical terms soften moral reality. As he later admitted, statistics had been inflated and rhetoric sharpened to sway public opinion. He had helped construct the narrative.

Yet moral clarity did not bring him peace. The weight of 75,000 deaths — including his own child’s — pressed on his conscience. Ethical reversal is not the same as absolution.

In search of mercy

Through conversations with Father John McCloskey, an Opus Dei priest, Nathanson began his second conversion. This one was spiritual. In December 1996, Cardinal John O’Connor baptized him in a private Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. He received confirmation and first communion that same day.

When asked why he chose Catholicism, his answer was simple: “No religion matches the special role for forgiveness that is afforded by the Catholic Church.”

That sentence reveals what ideology never could: Guilt demands more than argument. It demands mercy.

Father Gerald Murray, who preached at Nathanson’s funeral, compared him to Whittaker Chambers, the former Soviet spy who renounced communism and testified against it at immense personal cost. The comparison was deliberate. Both men had served destructive causes with conviction. Both knew their systems from the inside. And both chose to speak because silence was no longer possible.

Neither escaped consequences. Yet each chose truth over self-preservation.

Hard truth

Some readers will struggle to forgive what Nathanson did. The harm was real. It cannot be undone. But what he chose once he could no longer deny the truth also matters. The screams he confronted were silent, visible only through ultrasound. Once seen, they could not be unseen.

Our age desperately needs this kind of conversion — the courage to admit complicity and the humility to seek forgiveness. Wrongdoing is softened by clinical language. Responsibility is buried beneath justification. Technology makes victims invisible.

Nathanson’s life reminds us that seeing clearly carries a cost — but refusing to see carries a greater one.

He spent half his life destroying life and the other half defending it. Many spend their entire lives destroying life and never confront it.