![‘My trust was in God’: Priest recounts flight from Holy Land amid Iranian conflict #Catholic A Jesuit priest says he has a “much larger perspective” of the crisis of war after fleeing the Holy Land at the outset of U.S. and Israeli aggressions against Iran.Father Anthony Wieck, SJ, told EWTN News he was leading a pilgrimage of about 20 Catholics in the Holy Land when the war began on Feb. 28.“We had just spent a week in Galilee and prayed our way through the holy sites of Jesus’ teaching and miracles,” Wieck said, describing the region as “a lovely land [God] created for himself to enjoy on this earth.”The group arrived in Jerusalem on Feb. 26, he said, and the next day word began to spread of the need to evacuate from the region. Several pilgrims were able to leave immediately, Wieck said, while others who attempted to leave the next day were unable to get a flight out and eventually had to return to the pilgrim group.Ben Gurion International Airport “is not a safe place to be because there are military installations near the airport,” he said. “Iranian missiles were being sent that way, and our people ... were taken into the bomb shelter five stories down below the airport.”Wieck said that even as the conflict broke out, his group still toured holy sites, including the Church of the Pater Noster, where tradition holds that Christ taught the disciples to pray the Our Father. “We were instructed by our guide to continue the tour and to simply seek cover whenever the sirens went off,” he said, pointing out that “those living in Jerusalem are so used to warning sirens there that they have much less fear than we do. They’re observant but not fearful. And we were trusting them.”The priest was offering a chanted Mass at the Dominus Flevit Church while explosions sounded in the distance as Israel’s Iron Dome intercepted Iranian missiles.“It was scary, yes,” Wieck said. “But I continued the Mass with trust, and after Communion (before the final prayer) asked all pilgrims to pray for a couple minutes regarding where the Lord was in all of this situation.”
Father Anthony Wieck, SJ, says Mass at the Dominus Flevit Church in Jerusalem on Saturday, Feb. 28, 2026. | Credit: Father Anthony Wieck, SJ
After Mass, a group of pilgrims from Kansas joined them in the church amid sirens and explosions in the surrounding region. “It struck me as supremely important that we not make decisions based on fear but on faith,” he said.The priest’s group took a truncated walking tour of Jerusalem, he said, which “became eerily quiet that evening.”The tour company ordered them to evacuate the following morning. Departing for Jordan, the group found itself stuck amid a crush of evacuations in the area. “A typical two-hour trip to Amman, Jordan, took us seven hours,” Wieck said. And while the group initially “felt much safer being outside of Jerusalem,” they eventually felt “locked in” at their hotel, particularly amid mass flight cancellations.
Missile contrails are seen over the Holy Land region on Sunday, March 1, 2026. | Credit: Father Anthony Wieck, SJ
Jordanians in the area kept assuring the Americans that the country’s King Abdullah II would protect them. “Not feeling the same allegiance to their king, my trust was in God,” the priest said.The U.S. Department of State provided military evacuations to Americans in the area. “Little by little, our pilgrims found an occasional flight that [shuttled] them out of the war zone,” Wieck said. The priest and one other pilgrim, a religious from Phoenix, were the last from their group to remain in Jordan before they took a flight with Royal Jordanian Airlines on March 4. Wieck said the pilot took “great efforts to circumvent Israeli airspace.” The air carrier “was bold enough to keep to their travel plans despite the threats,” Wieck said, describing the airline as “my new favorite.” ‘Truly a Catholic experience’Wieck told EWTN News that he “would not say that I was stellar in my response to what God was doing here.” “I wanted to pray much but felt so much stress and trauma around me that it was truly difficult,” he said. “I was exhausted.”Yet during the frightening evacuation, he said, “hundreds of people” back home were lifting up the pilgrims with prayers and sacrifices. “They knew our plight was becoming a bit more grave,” he said.Back home in the U.S., Wieck, who lives in Louisiana, said he was still reflecting on what happened but said the harrowing ordeal gave him “a much larger perspective to have experienced profoundly how much we need the help of our brothers and sisters in times of crisis.”“It was truly a Catholic experience,” he said.“Though as humans we usually don’t carry our crosses in times of crisis all that well, our brothers and sisters in the faith can see us through. That was my experience,” he said.“How wonderful it is to be Catholic!” he added.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/my-trust-was-in-god-priest-recounts-flight-from-holy-land-amid-iranian-conflict-catholic-a-jesuit-priest-says-he-has-a-much-larger-perspective-of-the-crisis-of-wa.jpg)
Father Anthony Wieck, SJ, was leading a group of pilgrims in Jerusalem when the U.S. and Israel began launching strikes against Iran.
The 94-year-old Chinese prelate weighed in on the ongoing discussions between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X in a post on X.
In a video released on X, the Holy Father posed a question to the faithful: “Would you imagine what a world without wars would be like? A world without the terror of approaching explosions?”
![Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/democratic-lawmaker-asks-ice-director-if-hes-going-to-hell-in-fiery-hearing-catholic-a-democratic-lawmaker-asked-u-s-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice-acting-direc.jpg "Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.")
Top U.S. immigration officials defended their policies during a contentious hearing as lawmakers continue to negotiate potential ICE funding and reforms.
Catholic entrepreneurs Eddie Cullen and Karl Kilb want to use new financial technologies to benefit the Catholic Church and its charitable work.
The Franciscan Friars of California announced a bankruptcy filing in 2024 “to address 94 child sexual abuse claims.”
