Catholic priest accused of changing the outcome of the last NFL game of the season



With everything on the line, a Catholic priest's blessing may have changed the outcome of the NFL playoffs on Sunday.

The Pittsburgh Steelers hosted the Baltimore Ravens at Acrisure Stadium for "Sunday Night Football" with the season on the line. The game would decide who topped the AFC North and the final playoff spot.

'The Catholic community in Pittsburgh is very strong.'

A perfect, dramatic ending was set up for the last game of the season, after the Steelers went ahead 26-24 with a late touchdown. After blocking their opponent's extra point, the Ravens converted a pivotal fourth-down play to get into position for a 44-yard game-winning field goal.

However, kicker Tyler Loop pushed the ball right, and the Ravens lost in dramatic fashion.

Just after the game, NBC commentators Mike Tirico and Cris Collinsworth decided to sprinkle some Catholic lore on the ending and revealed that a priest may have been involved in the missed field goal.

At 6:15 p.m. local time, Tirico revealed, a priest was seen "spreading holy water" in the Steelers' defending end zone, where the kick was missed.

"The Catholic community in Pittsburgh is very strong ... and down at that end zone, Tyler Loop misses the ... field goal ... and allows the Steelers to win," Tirico explained.

"So it's not Tyler Loop's fault," Collinsworth laughed.

RELATED: Pope Leo calls out gambling addiction and 'demographic crisis' in Vatican meeting

The priest in question has since been named by local outlets as Father Maximilian Maxwell. Maxwell currently serves as the prior of Saint Vincent Archabbey in Latrobe, Pennsylvania. According to WJCL, the Steelers have held their training camp at the college since 1966.

At the same time, Benedictine Military School in Savannah, Georgia, was quick to claim Fr. Maxwell as one of its own and proudly boasted on the school's Facebook page.

"Check out former Benedictine Military School theology teacher Fr. Maximilian Maxwell blessing the Pittsburgh Steelers' football field with holy water before the game Sunday night!" the school wrote.

Following the dramatic ending, Steelers defensive lineman Cameron Heyward was asked about the potential blessed outcome.

"I'm not gonna ask questions," Heyward said, per WJCL. "The good Lord made a good decision tonight. I'm thankful, and we keep moving on."

RELATED: New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan resigns; pope appoints his replacement

Photo by Mark Alberti/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

On the other side of the ball, Ravens players still kept their faith, particularly Loop, who said he will be leaning on his religion to get him through the tough moment.

"I had written down a little prayer before the game. ... Faith is a big part of my life and right now I'm reading the book of Romans, and in Romans 8 it says God works for the good of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose."

Loop continued, "Ultimately, I'm here to love on the guys around me. I'm here to try and have their back ... reminding myself that 'hey, God's got my back even when stuff sucks.'"

Ravens running back Derrick Henry told reporters that he advised Loop to keep his faith and trust in God's plan.

"I just told him the story after this is gonna be great for him because God put him in this position to use him as an example," Henry revealed.

The Steelers will host the Houston Texans in Pittsburgh on January 12.

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

'Argument accepted': Dying 'Dilbert' creator and Trump ally Scott Adams says he's becoming a Christian



Scott Adams, the creator of the "Dilbert" comic strip and a frequent defender of President Donald Trump, revealed in May 2025 that he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer, it had metastasized to his bones, and he was not long for this world.

"The disease is already intolerable," said Adams. "So if you're wondering, 'Hey Scott, do you have any good days?' Nope. Nope. Every day is a nightmare, and evening is very worse."

'What happens next is between me and Jesus.'

While Adams had run out of good days, good news was on the horizon.

The 68-year-old cartoonist revealed on the Sunday episode of his show, "Real Coffee with Scott Adams," that he is converting to Christianity.

In November, Adams requested Trump's help in securing the prostate cancer drug Pluvicto for which his health care provider had apparently approved his application but "dropped the ball in scheduling the brief IV to administer it."

Trump and members of his administration indicated they were "on it" and apparently intervened on the cartoonist's behalf. However, Adams' potentially life-changing treatment was postponed last month on account of his radiation treatment.

Last week, Adams noted on his show that "the odds of me recovering are essentially zero."

In addition to suffering paralysis below the waist, Adams indicated that he is struggling to breathe on account of ongoing heart failure.

Days after telling his audience that January will probably be "a month of transition one way or the other," Adams made clear on Sunday that the imminent changes in his life were not all of a medical nature.

RELATED: Christian, what do you believe when faith stops being theoretical?

Photo by Bob Riha, Jr./Getty Images

"Many of my Christian friends and Christian followers say to me, 'Scott, you still have time. You should convert to Christianity.' And I usually just let that sit because that's not an argument I want to have," said Adams. "I've not been a believer. But I also have respect for any Christian who goes out of their way to try to convert me because how would I believe you and believe your own religion if you're not trying to convert me?"

'You're never too late.'

Evidently the efforts of Adams' friends were not in vain.

"You're going to hear for the first time today that it is my plan to convert," said Adams. "So I still have time. But my understanding is you're never too late. And on top of that, any skepticism I have about reality would certainly be instantly answered if I wake up in heaven."

Adams — who has long wrestled with questions about God and has been critical both of religion and atheism in his writing — notified his Christian friends that he does not require any more apologetics and has embraced what appears to be Catholic philosopher Blaise Pascal's argument for believing in God.

"I am now convinced that the risk-reward is completely smart. If it turns out that there's nothing there, I've lost nothing but I've respected your wishes, and I like doing that," said Adams. "If it turns out there is something there and the Christian model is the closest to it, I win."

"Argument made, argument accepted," added Adams.

In the wake of his announcement, Adams wrote on X that while he appreciates the outpouring of support and questions, "What happens next is between me and Jesus."

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

Christian, what do you believe when faith stops being theoretical?



Dietrich Bonhoeffer once wrote from a prison cell, “It is only by living completely in this world that one learns to have faith.” He wrote those words after the world had closed in, when faith could no longer remain theoretical.

I live with someone who understands exactly what he meant.

In those moments, belief stops being a feeling and becomes a claim. Not something you summon, but something you test.

My wife, Gracie, has lived with disabilities for virtually her entire life. Hospital rooms and operating schedules do not interrupt our life — they form its familiar terrain. Over time, suffering has stopped being a concept and become a place we recognize.

I also have a friend who understands what Bonhoeffer was describing.

Her name is Joni Eareckson Tada. A diving accident in her teens left her a quadriplegic. Her life has unfolded under paralysis, chronic pain, and illness. She does not approach suffering from a distance.

Last year, during one of Gracie’s long hospital stays, Joni called.

Most people asked about Gracie. Joni did too. But then she asked about me.

That question deserved more than a stock reply.

I paused.

Moments like that strip away emotional self-examination and force you to examine your claims instead.

As I spoke with Joni, I shared something that has steadied me for decades.

In our church, there came a moment when the pastor would stop, look out over the congregation, and ask a single question: “Christian, what do you believe?”

We did not improvise. We did not search for language that felt expressive or current. We stood and recited the Apostles’ Creed or the Nicene Creed. No personal spin. No tailoring belief to the moment. Just a clear declaration of what had been received.

That question stayed with me.

It returned again and again over the years, especially in places where explanations had lost their usefulness. I learned the limits of “why.” Even good answers rarely hold steady there.

In those moments, belief stops being a feeling and becomes a claim. Not something you summon, but something you test.

If Christ is who I say He is, then what does that require of me here?

I was not trying to manufacture courage or resolve. I was asking whether the faith I professed in calm settings could bear weight when standing itself cost something.

“Christian, what do you believe?”

Over time, many of the questions I once carried narrowed to that one. Not because the pain diminished or the losses stopped coming, but because belief, when real, clarifies responsibility.

The apostle Peter tells believers to be ready to give an answer for the hope within them. That readiness has nothing to do with eloquence. It comes from knowing where you stand.

As a new year begins, many caregivers feel little sense of reset, except for the deductible and the co-pay.

Some stand outside an ICU, looking through glass at someone they love. Others stand in different hallways, facing different kinds of loss. Different rooms. The same ache.

RELATED: Do not pass the plow: The danger of declaring a golden age without repentance

John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Bonhoeffer did not write from a place of safety or control. He wrote from confinement, where faith could no longer remain theoretical. Many recognize that narrowing, the sense that life has closed in and the ground beneath you has given way.

Faith is learned there, not discussed.

Exhaustion thins memory. Words scatter. Not everyone can recall creeds when sleep runs short and decisions carry real weight. But belief does not measure itself by recall. It reveals itself by posture.

When the floor gives way, you still need to know where to stand.

If He is Lord at all, then He is Lord of all.

Not only of sanctuaries, but of hospital corridors.

Not only of strength, but of weakness.

Not only of moments we would choose, but of moments we would never script.

That confession does not remove pain. It does not explain every loss. But it does tell us where to stand when the world presses in.

And when glass separates you from the one you love, whatever room that glass happens to be in, the question does not stay abstract.

It turns personal.

Christian, what do you believe?

Pope Leo calls out gambling addiction and 'demographic crisis' in Vatican meeting



Pope Leo XIV says people need more face-to-face interaction in their lives.

Speaking with Italian mayors from the association of local Italian authorities, the Assocazione Nazionale dei Comuni Italiani, the pope touched on some of the biggest issues faces the world today.

'Democracy atrophies, becomes just a name, a formality.'

During the Vatican meeting, Pope Leo noted that a "demographic crisis" and "struggles" among families and young people remain top issues. According to Vatican News, the Catholic leader also stated that social isolation and "social conflicts" are pervasive issues in Italy.

At the same time, the pope — Robert Francis Prevost — said he wanted to focus on one of the biggest topics in today's world: gambling. The Chicago native explained that he wanted to "draw attention in particular to the scourge of gambling," which has "ruined many families."

Citing a "major increase" in gambling in Italy in recent years, Prevost cited a recent report that described gambling as a "serious problem" in terms of education, mental health, and societal trust for Italians.

RELATED: New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan resigns; pope appoints his replacement

Photo by Simone Risoluti - Vatican Media via Vatican Pool/Getty Images

The pope stressed that gambling addiction is a form of "loneliness" and called on the local mayors to promote "authentically human relationships between citizens" as a way to tackle the issue.

Pope Leo reportedly drew from 20th-century Italian priest and activist Don Primo Mazzolari in order to illustrate the need for social interactions between Italians.

"[Italy] does not only need sewers, houses, roads, aqueducts, and pavements," but also "a way of feeling, of living, a way of looking at one another, and a way of coming together as brothers and sisters."

RELATED: Pope Leo XIV, Eastern Orthodox patriarch signal greater unity at site where Nicene Creed was adopted 1,700 years ago

Photo by Jacopo Raule/Getty Images for Philipp Plein

To solve many of these modern issues, authorities must listen to the weak and the poor, the pope said. If not, he said, "democracy atrophies, becomes just a name, a formality."

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

Forget 'Die Hard' — 'Brazil' is the ultimate Christmas movie



The cultural powers that be determined long ago that a film needn’t deal directly with the Nativity of our Lord and Savior to qualify as a “Christmas movie.”

Many films apparently qualify simply by virtue of their plot events’ proximity to December 25, their festive backdrops, and their occasional visual reference to Coca-Cola Claus, starred pines, and/or the birth of God.

In a way, the Christmas imagery does visually what the movie’s eponymous theme song does sonically: tease at something lovely and wonderful beyond the nightmare.

Rest assured as the bare-footed cop wastes German terrorists at his estranged wife’s office party; as the two burglars repeatedly fall prey to an abandoned adolescent’s mutilatory traps; and as the inventor’s son unwittingly turns his Chinatown-sourced present into a demon infestation — these are indeed Christmas movies.

Given the genre’s flexible criteria, Terry Gilliam’s 1985 masterpiece “Brazil” also qualifies.

State Santa

In truth, the Python alumnus’ film about a bureaucrat’s maddening investigation of his totalitarian government’s execution of the wrong man is a far stronger entry than “Die Hard,” “Home Alone,” “Gremlins,” and other such flicks.

Not only is there Christmastime imagery throughout, but such visuals are also of great importance, providing insights both into the treachery of the film’s principal antagonist — the state — as well as into what appears missing in Gilliam’s dystopian world.

In the opening scene, a man pushes a cart full of wrapped presents past a storefront window framed by tinsel and crowded with “Merry Christmas” signage, television sets, and baubles.

Next we enter an apartment where a mother reads “A Christmas Carol” to her daughter, a father wraps a present, and a boy plays at the foot of a well-dressed evergreen.

After numerous scenes featuring gift exchanges, mutterings of “Happy Christmas," and Christmas trees, we meet a kindly faced man dressed as Santa.

Jingle hells

This is, however, no feel-good Christmas movie.

The storefront window is firebombed.

Armored police storm into the family’s apartment, jab a rifle in the father’s gut, and take him away in a bag while his wife screams in horror.

The gifts exchanged and piling up throughout the film — besides the offers of job promotions and plastic surgery — appear to all be versions of the same novelty device, a meaningless “executive decision-maker.”

The kindly faced man dressed as Santa is a propaganda-spewing government official who rolls into the protagonist Sam Lowry’s padded cell on a wheelchair to inform Lowry — played by Jonathan Pryce — that his fugitive lover is dead.

With exception to the heart-warming domestic scene interrupted by the totalitarian bureaucracy’s jackboots at the beginning of the film, the Christmas imagery rings hollow and for good reason.

Extra to dehumanizing workplaces, purposefully meaningless work, bureaucratic red tape, and paperwork that’s so bad it ends up killing Robert DeNiro’s character — at least by the tortured protagonist’s account — the regime’s population-control scheme relies on consumerism.

The regime has, accordingly, done its apparent best to empty Christmas of the holy day’s real significance and meaning, donning it as a costume to sell and control.

RELATED: Santa Claus: Innocent Christmas fun or counterfeit Jesus?

Beyond the nightmare

“Brazil” is not, however, an anti-Christmas film.

The emptiness of the costume prompts reflection about its proper filling — a reflection that should invariably lead one to Christ.

In a way, the Christmas imagery does visually what the movie’s eponymous theme song does sonically: tease at something lovely and wonderful beyond the nightmare Gilliam once dubbed “Nineteen Eighty-Four-and-a-Half.”

“I had this vision of a radio playing exotic music on a beach covered in coal dust, inspired by a visit to the steel town of Port Talbot. Originally the song I had in mind was Ry Cooder’s 'Maria Elena,' but later I changed it to 'Aquarela do Brasil' by Ary Barroso,” Gilliam told the Guardian.

“The idea of someone in an ugly, despairing place dreaming of something hopeful led to Sam Lowry, trapped in his bureaucratic world, escaping into fantasy.”

Whereas the recurrent theme from the samba references a fantasy the regime can crush, the various indirect reminders that Christmas is about more than presents and half-hearted niceties reference a hidden truth and source of eternal hope: that God was born in Bethlehem.

Why the pro-life movement fails without a Christian worldview



In the United States and other Western nations, pro-life organizations are the primary means through which conservative Christians oppose legalized abortion.

With their cultural engagement and legislative efforts, these pro-life groups and leaders purport to oppose the murder of preborn babies, ultimately desiring the complete end of abortion. But a simple examination of the worldviews held by these groups shows that many are not operating in a distinctly Christian fashion, even when they are led by professing Christians.

We continue to practice child sacrifice today through abortion.

Some pro-life organizations are self-admittedly non-sectarian, seeking to build coalitions of anti-abortion people who may be Christians, other religious conservatives, agnostics and atheists, or feminists.

But even the pro-life groups that are convictionally Christian, or led by convictional Christians, often functionally set aside the Christian worldview.

The church through the ages, bearing the gospel of life, has been the means by which the deathly deeds of child sacrifice have been overturned in countless cultures. The dearth of a Christian worldview in the current anti-abortion movement should, therefore, be gravely concerning to any believer who likewise wants to see modern child sacrifice abolished.

The doctrine of man

Christianity teaches that humans are creatures made in the image of God with rational souls (Ecclesiastes 7:29), but that mankind fell in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:1-7) and became dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1-3). We, therefore, have a thoroughly corrupted nature by which we are innately inclined toward evil (Romans 3:10-18).

The act of child sacrifice is one particularly brazen form of evil toward which man has always been predisposed. The murder of children for reasons of prosperity or convenience has occurred on every continent and was practiced by most major civilizations at some point in their history.

We continue to practice child sacrifice today through abortion.

In almost every abortion decision, the motivation is a rejection of inconvenient responsibility, the desire to prioritize college or career, or some other factor that could never even start to approach a justified reason for murdering an innocent human made in the image of God.

Western nations used to presuppose the Christian worldview. But in recent centuries, Enlightenment ideas have corrupted or entirely usurped the Christian worldview, especially concerning the sinful state of human nature.

Rather than saying that mankind is a valuable yet fallen creature, Enlightenment heretics taught that humans are fundamentally blank slates or even morally good and that with education or infusion of knowledge, mankind can experience true moral progression.

Such a worldview can be seen in pro-life groups claiming that “if wombs had windows, babies would be protected from abortions.” Others say that they are working to “make abortion unthinkable,” as if sin could ever be made completely unthinkable to fallen sinners.

— (@)

Enlightenment presuppositions about human nature also impact pro-life legislative strategy. Many pro-life groups try to pass laws that seek to mandate informed consent or require viewing ultrasounds before a woman willfully decides to murder her preborn baby.

While some pregnant mothers, especially those who are already soliciting the help of a crisis pregnancy center, may choose life after seeing an ultrasound image of their babies, there are still plenty of others who choose to murder their babies even after seeing the images.

In other words, abortion is not caused by mere ignorance, but by the selfish desires of fallen men and women who value their own prosperity or convenience more than the very lives of their children.

— (@)

We indisputably live in a culture of death that increasingly accepts abortion. But the development of this culture has occurred alongside the most rapid development of ultrasound technology.

In past generations, mothers and fathers did not see advanced ultrasounds of their preborn babies, yet those generations were considerably more anti-abortion than their children and grandchildren are today. In our current culture, everyone has seen ultrasounds of their own children or the children of others, but abortion is more accepted and even normalized, despite this increased knowledge about life in the womb.

The answer to legalized abortion is not merely an infusion of more education or knowledge for those who would willfully murder their preborn babies.

The answer to legalized abortion is to make abortion illegal. But pro-life organizations are often hesitant to embrace such a position.

The doctrine of government

Christianity teaches that God has established civil authorities to govern human society (Genesis 9:6). These civil authorities are servants of God commanded to bear the sword (Romans 13:1-7) against those who practice evil (1 Peter 2:14). The government exists under the dominion of Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:16) to uphold the public good and to deter evil conduct through the threat of swift punishment (Ecclesiastes 8:11). The act of murdering a preborn baby qualifies for such penalties (Exodus 21:22-25).

Most pro-life organizations would agree with God that abortion is murder. Many would agree that because preborn babies are made in the image of God, there is no inherent moral difference between murdering a person who has been born and a person who has not yet been born.

But when legislating against abortion, they almost never extend that moral equivalence into a legal equivalence, and they functionally address abortion as less than murder.

Many pro-life groups have even actively subverted efforts to establish equal protection of the laws for preborn babies.

Rather than simply treating abortion as murder, they self-admittedly seek to be “innovative” with the laws they write, and they almost never create effective anti-abortion deterrents as a result.

The vast majority of pro-life bills regulate the circumstances of abortion. They allow for abortion once certain conditions are met, such as murdering a baby provided that he or she receives a proper burial, or murdering a baby before he or she reaches a certain stage of development.

Some even adopt the false moral framework of abortion activists by regulating abortion like health care. They allow abortion after the woman who desires to murder her preborn baby first obtains permission from a doctor, essentially legitimizing and sanitizing abortion through the health care system.

There are many proposals specifically targeted at providers of abortion pills, ignoring the reality that even if the flow of abortion pills is truly halted, many methods of abortions exist beyond those substances and have become increasingly popular in recent years.

These laws largely shift behavior rather than save lives, ensuring that abortions continue through legally sanctioned channels instead of deterring the act of abortion entirely.

— (@)

The emphasis of these pro-life regulations is not criminalizing abortion as murder. If the pro-life groups that write such legislation acted consistently with their professed beliefs about abortion as murder, they would seek to criminalize all abortion accordingly.

But instead of pursuing such an objective, many pro-life groups have even actively subverted efforts to establish equal protection of the laws for preborn babies.

Christian organizations have repeatedly proposed bills that would simply extend the existing homicide, assault, and wrongful death laws that protect born people in order to protect preborn people. Rather than supporting those bills, leading pro-life groups have issued a national open letter to all lawmakers in the U.S., urging them to oppose such proposals because they could lead to penalties for women who willfully have abortions.

Over the past decade, state and national pro-life organizations have been instrumental in subverting dozens of equal protection bills, largely in conservative states that should otherwise have the power to abolish abortion.

— (@)

The task of civil authorities, as the Christian worldview affirms, is the punishment of wicked conduct, which preserves innocent life by deterring future wicked conduct and provides justice on behalf of the victims. God clearly expects abortion, which is an act of murder, to be punished by civil authorities.

When pro-life groups advocate for regulating abortion rather than punishing those who willfully murder their preborn babies, they protect the legally sanctioned practice of abortion and keep the sword of justice in the sheath.

These pro-life groups not only enable the murder of preborn babies made in the image of God, but protect conduct that damages the bodies and souls of the perpetrators.

The doctrine of repentance

Christianity teaches that repentance occurs when a sinner sees his or her sin as contrary to the nature and law of God (1 John 3:9), despises those sins (2 Corinthians 7:10), and turns from them to Jesus Christ (Acts 17:30-31). In order to properly confess sins, one must specifically name and acknowledge them before God (Psalm 32:5).

Many pro-life organizations not only oppose laws that could impose penalties on women who willfully have abortions, but actively write blanket legal immunity for women who have abortions into their laws. They insist that women who have abortions are categorically second victims, meaning that they cannot be held legally accountable for their actions.

Some pro-life groups claim that most women are coerced into abortions. Others insist that our culture of death removes all accountability from women by indoctrinating them into believing that their preborn babies are mere clumps of cells.

Such arguments are then used to support laws exempting all women — including those who can be shown in a court of law to have willfully murdered their preborn babies — from any criminal penalties.

— (@)

But the assertions about widespread coercion are simply not true, as even surveys sponsored by pro-life research groups indicate that only a very small minority of women are truly forced into abortions they do not want.

In the same way, merely choosing to convince oneself of falsehood does not excuse evil actions that follow from those lies and almost never qualifies for the mistake of fact necessary to excuse someone of legal culpability.

Beyond the poor arguments required to support the claim that all women are categorical victims of abortion, and the ways in which they undermine the cultural and political credibility of pro-life groups, these arguments also deprive women who have had abortions of true repentance and, therefore, true forgiveness.

Those with a Christian worldview would invite a woman who has murdered her own preborn baby to confess her sin before God and receive abundant forgiveness through the gospel. But pro-life groups and leaders who believe that all women are second victims of abortion have little to offer such women beyond hollow “sympathy” and therapeutic reassurance.

— (@)

If a woman is a mere victim who has not committed sin, then she has no need of repentance because she has no specific fault to confess before God.

But most women are willful participants in their own abortions. When pro-life groups insist to all women that they are indeed victims, they rob the very women they claim to love of any hope for true peace and pardon.

The pro-life groups functionally seeking to oppose abortion outside the Christian worldview will continue in their failure to end abortion. They will continue to lose, not only to the detriment of their cause but to the detriment of countless millions of preborn babies.

Christianity alone has the potency to end child sacrifice in a depraved civilization like the U.S. and the broader Western world. If we want to abolish abortion, Christians must never set aside the truth of God, but instead rely on the light of those truths to dispel the darkness of child sacrifice once and for all.

Do not pass the plow: The danger of declaring a golden age without repentance



I live in Montana. Driving in snow is simply part of life here.

When the storm is heavy and the road is bad, you do not pass the snowplow. You go at its speed. You let it clear the way. Trying to rush past does not make the road safer or the journey faster. It only increases the risk.

Does God wink at sin in order to bless a nation — or does Scripture teach the opposite?

I have watched people try anyway. Confidence surges, patience thins, and effort begins to feel like wisdom. Some get away with it. Some do not. Either way, the plow keeps moving — unhurried and unmoved by urgency.

The rush to declare victory

As we approach a new year, I find myself thinking about that lesson while listening to Christians talk about the future of our country.

Some are already calling 2026 a coming “golden age of America.” Others argue that Christian nationalism offers the corrective path forward — that the nation must reclaim explicitly Christian leadership, laws, and identity. Christians, they say, must take the reins.

Christians should care deeply about their culture. Scripture calls us to be salt and light. Many believers already serve faithfully in the highest offices of the state, and we should encourage and equip more to do so. The question is not whether Christians should serve, but what posture we bring with us when we do.

Scripture is remarkably clear about order. In 2 Chronicles, healing and restoration are promised only after God’s people humble themselves, pray, seek His face, and turn from their ways. The sequence is not optional. Humbling comes before healing.

So why does the language of a coming golden age seem so detached from the language of repentance?

There is no denying that our culture has lost moral traction. Christians are not imagining the collapse. And more than 60 million abortions since 1973 are not a statistic a nation simply absorbs and leaves behind. Scripture never treats the shedding of innocent blood lightly.

Outrage is easy. Obedience is harder.

When sin is not merely tolerated but established as policy, what is the response of the people of God?

Outrage may be understandable. Indignation is certainly warranted. Resistance, in some form, may be necessary. But resistance to what — and by what means?

Scripture tells us plainly that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood. We say we believe that. The question is whether we act like it. If the battle is spiritual, why do so many of our responses rely almost entirely on human strength, political leverage, and cultural power?

If we are not fighting flesh and blood, why would we expect victory through our own understanding rather than by seeking God’s? And how can we presume upon His wisdom while bypassing the very repentance Scripture says must come first?

Where is the snowplow in this moment?

Prosperity is often treated as evidence of God’s blessing, but Scripture never makes that equation automatic. Drug cartels are prosperous. Entire industries built on sexual exploitation generate staggering wealth. So the question is not whether something flourishes, but why.

Does prosperity always signal God’s approval — or can it also reflect restraint removed, a people being given over to what they insist on pursuing? If abundance alone proves blessing, how do we account for how easily sin thrives?

Invoking God does not obligate Him

We frequently say, “God bless America,” but what do we mean when we invoke God’s name publicly? In 2013, a sitting U.S. president closed a speech to Planned Parenthood by saying, “God bless Planned Parenthood, and God bless America.”

That raises a serious question for Christians. When a national leader invokes God’s blessing in that way, does the language function merely as personal sentiment, or as representative speech? And more importantly, can those appeals be reconciled biblically? Can the same God who condemns the shedding of innocent blood be invoked to bless both its defenders and the nation at large without contradiction?

Does God wink at sin in order to bless a nation — or does Scripture teach the opposite?

This question is not aimed at unbelievers, who feel no obligation to repent. It is aimed squarely at the church.

Throughout Scripture, when God’s people finally grasped the weight of their sin, the response was not triumphal language or claims of destiny. It was confession. Leaders did not announce renewal. They acknowledged guilt. Only then did rebuilding begin.

So why does so much talk of a coming golden age contain so little talk of repentance?

The passages often cited to support Christian political dominance proclaim Christ’s authority. That authority is not in dispute. What is less often examined is how Christ exercises it. Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world. The early church did not secure influence through force or control, but through obedience, suffering, prayer, and faithful witness.

And through that path, it changed the world.

Conservatism is not holiness. Holiness runs deeper than alignment, platforms, or policy wins. Scripture places the deepest problem of any nation not in its laws, but in the human heart. Legislation may restrain behavior, but it cannot regenerate souls. That work belongs to the gospel.

RELATED: Christmas without Katie — and without accountability

Photo by: Philippe Lissac/Godong/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

God is not in a hurry

As a caregiver, I have learned the hard way that effort is not the same as health. When the pressure is high and the outcome uncertain, urgency can feel responsible. Control can masquerade as diligence.

But we do not get credit for effort if it lands us in a ditch. Trying to pass the plow does not create progress. It creates wreckage.

God is not rushed. He moves at His pace, not ours.

Repentance is not the abandonment of influence; it is the only ground on which influence survives.

If God is who He says He is, what wisdom is there in rushing ahead of Him?

Which leaves a final question for the people of God: Are we asking the Lord to bless what we refuse to repent of?

Scripture’s order has not changed. Humility precedes healing. Repentance comes before restoration. And when we declare a golden age without repentance, we should not be surprised if what we have built turns out to be a golden calf.

Exorcisms are exploding across America — but nobody wants to admit why



From Michigan to Melbourne, exorcisms are rising — an odd trend in an age when Christianity is supposedly retreating.

Odd, that is, if you accept the official story: that faith has faded, churches have emptied, and modern life has supposedly outgrown such concerns. Yet behind parish doors and rectory walls, priests report the opposite: more calls, cases, and urgency.

Evil persists not because it is misunderstood, but because it is minimized.

The demonic, it seems, didn’t get the secular memo.

I began making inquiries recently, speaking with clergy who have dealt with what most people would rather joke about, pathologize, or turn into content. One name surfaced repeatedly: Fr. Michael Shadbolt, a veteran priest who had performed numerous exorcisms and spoke of them with measured calm. I reached out to him for insight. Instead, I received word that he had recently passed away.

Thankfully, there was another source, carrying decades of experience where spiritual and psychological care meet. Fr. Stephen Rossetti, an American Catholic priest and seasoned exorcist, spoke without qualification.

“Yes, requests for exorcisms are on the rise in the U.S. and in other countries as well,” he told me. “There may be many reasons for this, but one obvious one is the decline of the practice of the faith.”

That observation runs counter to the fashionable narrative. The usual explanation for the rise in exorcisms is framed as a paradox: Christianity declines, so belief in demons increases.

But that framing flatters modern assumptions. It treats belief as an all-or-nothing package. Either accept the creed or discard the lot. But human experience has never worked that way.

One doesn’t need to believe in God to believe in evil — it’s everywhere. A loved one consumed by addiction. The husband who revels in beating his wife. The wife who revels in beating her husband. The son who turns on parents with lethal force.

RELATED: Interview with an exorcist: 'God always takes the first step'

D-Keine/Getty Images

Evil doesn’t depend on belief to function. It advances through repetition, fixation, and the gradual loss of restraint. The language shifts with each generation, but the pattern remains. Every day, roughly 137 women and girls are killed worldwide in acts of femicide. Child sacrifice, usually relegated to ancient Peru or remote civilizations, still occurs in parts of Africa today. In the U.S., one in four girls and one in six boys will be sexually abused before the age of 18.

No vocabulary of Pinkertonian progress dissolves these facts. Calling evil “trauma” or “dysfunction” may describe the damage left behind, but it doesn’t confront the force itself. Such language manages outcomes while leaving causes untouched.

The modern world prefers to believe that evil is a misunderstanding, a system failure, or a lack of education. History suggests otherwise. Evil persists not because it is misunderstood, but because it is minimized. It thrives where it is renamed, rationalized, or treated as an embarrassing superstition.

Fr. Rossetti put it plainly, “Increasingly people are not protected by faith, and many are involved in occult practices, which are a clear opening to the demonic.”

That point is crucial. Militant atheism is seldom the starting point. The entry point is engagement with practices the Church has long warned against.

“We have a number of cases of people who drifted away from the faith and then got into the occult,” Rossetti explained. “After a few years, they found themselves afflicted by evil spirits.”

The remedy is clear. “The first thing we do is have them go to confession, start practicing the faith, and live a virtuous life,” he said. “All sin is an opening to evil in some way, and the worse the sins, the greater the opening.”

It is precisely for this reason, Rossetti continued, “that exorcisms are very effective.” However, he stressed, there’s no wand, no instant result. “Sometimes the process takes time. It is typically not one and done,” Rossetti said. After years of spell-casting, curse-making, and demon worship — often misidentified as “self-discovery” or “ancient wisdom” — it can take far longer to undo the damage.

He was explicit about the timeline. “It typically takes three to five years of exorcisms to liberate the person.” The process, he added, is one of conversion and purification.

“An exorcism is not magic,” he said.

The hierarchy is clear and always has been: Christ reigns, angels serve, demons defy — and ultimately lose.

What we are witnessing, then, is not the complete disappearance of belief but its fragmentation. Christianity retreats institutionally while belief itself goes feral. Old anchors are cut loose. New fixations rush in. The vacuum does not remain empty.

Look around. Astrology, once harmless nonsense, has become a personal operating system. It graduated from brainless fun to life-management software, complete with a $3 billion price tag. Tarot cards are sold as “self-care.” Witchcraft is rebranded as empowerment, paganism as wellness. Social media is saturated with spiritual freelancers promising protection, manifestation, and power — usually bundled with a payment link.

None of this is neutral, and none of it is consequence-free. Doors opened casually tend to stay open.

This is where the supposed paradox dissolves. Christianity isn’t retreating because belief vanished, but because belief lost its footing. Structure recedes, so superstition rises. When doctrine disappears, disorder follows. There is no neutrality — only exposure.

For those skeptical because of Hollywood portrayals, exorcism is not a medieval curiosity revived for effect, but a practical response to persistent realities. The Church isn’t inventing demons to stay relevant. Rather, it is reacting to what it actually sees — a culture defined by isolation, instability, and constant immersion in content that destroys self-control and sanity.

Fr. Rossetti was clear on the final point, one that many increasingly resist.

“It is critical to understand that Jesus is Lord and not Satan,” he said. “The big mistake people make today is thinking that Satan is so very powerful. He is not.”

Compared to Christ, “Satan is dust.” He has no authority unless it is surrendered.

Christian theology has never been ambiguous on this point. Satan is not a rival god, not an equal force locked in cosmic balance. He is a created being who rebelled, fell, and was expelled. His power is parasitic rather than inherent. He doesn’t rule a kingdom by right, but lurks in territory abandoned through disobedience and pride.

The hierarchy is clear and always has been: Christ reigns, angels serve, demons defy — and ultimately lose.

That, it seems, is the warning embedded in the rise of exorcisms. Not that evil has grown stronger, but that we have grown careless. We treated the spiritual realm as a curiosity, then a hobby, then a marketplace — and acted surprised when something followed us home.

Fr. Rossetti put it without hesitation: “Jesus is Lord and has smashed Satan’s kingdom.” The tragedy is that many live as though He hasn’t.

How Christians honored a truce the left never accepted



It’s Christmastime, and you can feel the shift in the air.

Something has changed in the nation’s mood. People smile more easily. Familiar music returns. And — quietly but unmistakably — you can say “Merry Christmas” again without apologizing for it. The president of the United States quotes the Gospel of John when he speaks about Jesus.

Christians need to face a hard truth: The truce was a mistake.

For a few short weeks, Americans remember what this season is actually about. Not a generic winter festival. Not a vague celebration of “light” or “togetherness.” But the birth of Jesus Christ — a real event in history that changed everything.

For centuries, Christians have marked this season to reflect on the incarnation of the Son of God. “Christ is the reason for the season” is not a slogan; it is a confession. God entered history. He took on flesh. He came to save sinners. Christianity is not built on myth or metaphor but on eyewitness testimony to what actually happened.

America is now remembering — haltingly, imperfectly — the central role of Christ in its own history. That recovery follows decades of effort by atheists and secular ideologues to banish Christ from the public square. Unfortunately, Christians largely agreed to the truce that made this possible. They kept their faith private while Marxists were happy to occupy public education.

In the 1960s, American Christians accepted what amounted to a truce. I half-jokingly call it the Madalyn Murray O’Hair deal. The now largely forgotten atheist activist sued to remove prayer and biblical instruction from public schools. Christians acquiesced. Public education, they were told, would be “neutral.” Religion would be kept out. Faith would be private.

Christians kept their side of the deal.

The Marxists did not — because they never agreed to one. They announced their intentions openly. They promised to march through the institutions, and they did. Universities filled with faculty who identify as left or far left and who teach Marxist frameworks as settled truth.

Today, it is easier to find a committed Marxist on campus than a practicing Christian.

For 60 years, Marxist philosophy crept into K-12 education and then saturated higher education. What was once smuggled in under euphemism is now proudly declared. Professors announce their ideology on syllabi and use taxpayer dollars to teach students that America is structurally racist and that “whiteness” is a form of oppression.

There was never neutrality. There was only a vacuum — and Marxism rushed in to fill it.

I saw this emptiness firsthand on my own campus at Arizona State University.

At ASU’s West Valley campus, administrators recently installed a “winter wonderland” display. Not Christmas lights — “winter” lights. Decorations carefully stripped of any reference to Christ. The existential meaninglessness was almost overwhelming.

Lights were strung up to flicker briefly in the darkness before being taken down and discarded. What did it mean? What did it point to beyond itself?

Or, as Hemingway wrote, was it simply nada y pues nada y pues nada — nothing, and then nothing, and then nothing?

This is what happens when you preserve form while evacuating content. Ritual without meaning. Celebration without hope. Light without truth.

Christmas is the opposite of that.

Christmas does not offer a vague lesson about darkness giving way to light. It proclaims that Jesus Christ is the light of the world. It is not a symbolic story to be endlessly reinterpreted but a declaration that Christ was born in history, of a virgin, in fulfillment of prophecy, to redeem a fallen world.

That is why efforts to drain Christmas of its meaning always feel strained. When leftists substitute “winter celebrations” and “seasonal observances,” they do not offer neutrality. They offer emptiness — sometimes dressed up as inclusion, sometimes as bureaucracy, sometimes as pagan revivalism. Light shows without the Logos. Rituals without redemption.

Christians need to face a hard truth: The truce was a mistake.

There is no neutral education. There never has been. Every curriculum conveys values. Every institution forms souls. The only question is whether students will be formed in the light of Christ or in the ideology of those who openly despise Him.

RELATED: The truth about Christmas: Debunking the pagan origin myth once and for all

Photo by: Sepia Times/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Christmas exposes the lie of neutrality. It reminds us that history has meaning, that truth entered the world, and that human beings answer to something higher than administrative guidelines or ideological fashion.

So this year, I am not whispering, “Happy Holidays.” I am saying, “Merry Christmas” — to students, to colleagues, to anyone who will hear it.

Parents and students should remember something crucial: Universities answer to you. You are not passive consumers. You set expectations. You decide what kind of formation is acceptable.

When you see your professors, say, “Merry Christmas.” Say it cheerfully. Say it unapologetically. What you are affirming is not sentiment but truth: that Christ came into the world, and no amount of bureaucratic rebranding can erase Him.

The lights will flicker and fade. Christ will not.

Merry Christmas.

Christian Almost Murdered Twice By Islamists Finds Home In Canada For Christmas

Michael and his family no longer need fear for their lives, but the same cannot be said for the millions of Christians living in Pakistan.