Faith Facts

• Maine’s highest court has upheld a ruling allowing a father to prevent his daughter from attending Calvary Chapel with her mother during custody visits
• A lower court accepted an expert’s testimony characterizing the church as cult-like, a claim the mother disputes
• The decision raises significant questions about parental rights and religious freedom in custody disputes

Maine’s highest court has delivered a controversial ruling in a custody dispute that puts religious freedom and parental rights in tension. The court upheld a decision allowing a father to forbid his daughter from attending Calvary Chapel services with her mother.

The case centers on a contested custody arrangement where the mother regularly attends a Calvary Chapel congregation with her daughter. The father objected to the church attendance, and the lower court sided with him after hearing testimony from an expert witness.

That expert characterized the church as resembling a “cult,” a claim that has drawn sharp criticism from religious liberty advocates. Calvary Chapel is a well-established Protestant denomination with hundreds of congregations nationwide, known for contemporary worship and Bible-centered teaching.

The mother disputes the characterization of her church and has fought to maintain her right to share her faith with her daughter. However, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court found no legal error in the lower court’s decision to restrict the child’s church attendance during the mother’s parenting time.

The ruling has alarmed religious freedom organizations who see it as a dangerous precedent. When courts accept subjective labels like “cult” to restrict constitutionally protected religious practice, families of faith face an uncertain landscape in custody proceedings.

Legal experts note that while courts routinely consider the best interests of children in custody cases, religious practice has traditionally received strong protection. This case appears to create new grounds for limiting a parent’s ability to include children in worship.

The father’s attorneys argued that the church environment was harmful to the child’s well-being. The mother’s legal team countered that attending church represents core religious expression protected by the First Amendment, and that no evidence of actual harm to the child was presented.

Calvary Chapel churches emphasize Biblical authority, evangelism, and discipleship. They are part of the broader evangelical Protestant tradition and are not typically classified as non-mainstream or cultish by religious scholars.

Critics of the ruling point out that allowing one parent to veto another’s religious practice sets a troubling standard. In an increasingly secular legal system, some worry that traditional Christian beliefs and practices could face growing scrutiny and restriction.

The case also highlights the vulnerability of divorced or separated Christian parents who may find their faith practices subject to court oversight and control. What happens in one jurisdiction can influence legal reasoning elsewhere.

As American culture becomes more divided over religious and moral questions, family courts are becoming new battlegrounds. Cases like this one in Maine demonstrate how judicial decisions can profoundly impact the ability of Christians to raise their children in the faith.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith Facts

• A Christian father attempted to eliminate all screens from his children’s lives but ended the experiment after only eleven days
• The failure wasn’t due to children’s complaints, but because parents weren’t providing meaningful alternatives to digital entertainment
• The experience highlights the deeper spiritual challenge facing Christian families: cultivating purposeful, Christ-centered home life in a digital age

A candid confession from a Christian father is sparking important conversations about screen time, parenting, and what families are truly offering their children in place of digital distractions. His honest admission challenges the assumption that simply removing technology will solve deeper issues in family life.

“We tried the zero screens experiment like everybody else. It lasted eleven days,” the father wrote. “It did not fail because my kids wore me down… It failed because I was not actually offering them anything.”

The revelation cuts to the heart of a struggle many Christian parents face: the recognition that banning screens is the easy part. The harder challenge is creating a home environment rich enough in purpose, relationship, and meaningful activity that children don’t default to digital escape.

When the experiment ended, the father discovered that his children’s desire for screens hadn’t diminished. This uncomfortable truth forced him to confront a deeper question: What was his family life actually providing? Were parents investing time in activities that genuinely engaged their children’s hearts and minds, or had screens simply been filling a void that already existed?

The experience resonates with Christian families nationwide who are grappling with technology’s role in their homes. Many parents recognize that screens aren’t inherently evil, but they can become substitutes for the rich family life that honors God—one filled with conversation, creativity, service, and intentional discipleship.

Scripture calls parents to train up children in the way they should go (Proverbs 22:6), a command that requires active engagement, not just prohibition. Removing screens without replacing them with something substantive doesn’t address the underlying issue: children need parents who are fully present, engaged, and offering them a vision of life worth pursuing.

The father’s honesty about his experiment’s failure offers a valuable lesson. It’s not enough to remove what we don’t want our children consuming. Christian parents must cultivate homes where faith is lived out daily, where conversation flows freely, where work and play have purpose, and where children see modeled before them lives that reflect Christ’s priorities.

This means parents must examine their own habits and investments. Are they providing mentorship, teaching life skills, creating space for boredom that leads to creativity, and most importantly, demonstrating that a life centered on Christ is more fulfilling than any digital alternative?

The screen debate in Christian homes shouldn’t be primarily about rules and restrictions. It should prompt deeper reflection about what kind of family culture we’re building and whether we’re equipping our children with the tools, relationships, and faith foundation they need to thrive.

When parents recognize that the problem isn’t just the screens but the absence of compelling alternatives, they can begin building homes that naturally draw children toward better things. That requires intentionality, sacrifice of parental time and comfort, and a commitment to being fully present—challenges far greater than simply enforcing a ban.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith Facts

• LEAD Public Schools, a Tennessee charter network operating 17 schools, has agreed to remove LGBT-themed children’s books from its curriculum following concerns about state parental consent laws
• The Alliance Defending Freedom sent a legal demand letter warning the schools could be violating Tennessee’s Age-Appropriate Materials Act requiring parental consent for certain content
• The curriculum materials included books featuring LGBT characters and themes that parents were not given prior notice about or opportunity to review

A network of public charter schools in Tennessee has agreed to remove LGBT-themed children’s books from its curriculum after a Christian legal organization warned the materials could violate state law. LEAD Public Schools, which operates 17 charter schools across Tennessee, made the decision following a demand letter from the Alliance Defending Freedom.

The legal group raised concerns that the curriculum violated Tennessee’s Age-Appropriate Materials Act, which requires schools to obtain parental consent before exposing students to certain materials. According to attorneys, parents were not given adequate notice or opportunity to review the LGBT-themed books being used in classrooms.

The Alliance Defending Freedom argued that the materials violated both state law and parental rights by introducing content related to sexual orientation and gender identity without proper notification or consent procedures. The organization has been at the forefront of defending parental rights in education across the nation.

LEAD Public Schools’ decision to remove the materials represents a victory for parental rights advocates who have been pushing back against age-inappropriate content in public schools. The case highlights the growing tension between progressive educational agendas and traditional family values in American classrooms.

Tennessee has been among several states taking action to ensure parents maintain primary authority over their children’s education, particularly regarding sensitive topics. The Age-Appropriate Materials Act reflects the state’s commitment to protecting children and respecting parental authority.

The removal of these materials demonstrates that when parents stand up for their rights and values, meaningful change can occur. This case may serve as a precedent for other school districts facing similar concerns about curriculum content that conflicts with community values.

Christian and conservative parents have increasingly organized to review school curricula and ensure materials align with their values and state law. The Alliance Defending Freedom continues to provide legal support to families navigating these challenges in school systems nationwide.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.