Court Bans Maine Christian Mum From Bringing Daughter to Church Due to 'Dangerous' Rapture Teaching

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court on 1 September upheld a Portland District Court order giving Matthew Bradeen final authority over key parts of his 13-year-old daughter's religious upbringing, including sole decision-making over her involvement with Calvary Chapel Greater Portland.

The ruling rejected an appeal by the child's mother, Emily Bickford, who argued that the restrictions violated her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

The decision did not find that Christianity, the Bible or belief in the Rapture was inherently harmful. Instead, the high court upheld findings that the child's anxiety, panic attacks and strained relationship with her father were linked to the handling of religious disputes and specific messages presented to the child about Bradeen.

The dispute dates to September 2021, when Bradeen asked the District Court to modify a 2013 shared-parenting order. He alleged that Bickford had involved their daughter in religious activities without his agreement.

Bickford filed her own motions, accusing Bradeen of trying to prevent the child's religious training and church attendance. Mediation resolved most issues, but religion and healthcare remained contested.

Court Focused on Child's Best Interests

According to the Supreme Judicial Court's opinion, Bickford began attending Calvary Chapel Greater Portland with the child in 2021. The trial court later heard evidence that the church taught about Hell and the Second Coming, and found that the girl had asked whether her father would be in Heaven, feared he would be 'left behind' and had experienced panic attacks connected to those topics.

The record also went beyond doctrine. The District Court found that Bickford repeatedly made religious decisions without consulting Bradeen, despite a shared-parenting order requiring joint decisions. It also found that messages delivered through the church portrayed Bradeen as an adversary to the child's faith and risked alienating the child from him.

Crucially, the lower court said there had been no demonstrated harm to the child simply from a belief system rooted in the Bible. It instead attributed the harm to Bickford's inability to co-parent on religion, her deference to the church on decision-making and specific messaging that divided the child from her father.

The December 2024 order gave Bradeen sole authority over the child's involvement with Calvary Chapel Greater Portland. For other churches, religious organisations or teachings, the parents must consult and jointly research whether participation is in the child's best interests. If they cannot agree, Bradeen has final decision-making authority.

First Amendment Challenge Rejected

Bickford argued that restrictions on directing her daughter's religious upbringing required the court to apply strict constitutional scrutiny. Maine's highest court disagreed, holding that disputes between two parents can be resolved under the state's best-interest standard, including when religion is involved.

The justices nevertheless stressed that courts must remain neutral towards religion. They said a judge would violate the Constitution by favouring one parent because of religion, displaying hostility towards a parent's beliefs or otherwise allowing religious bias to influence a best-interest analysis.

Bickford also argued that the trial court had shown hostility by referring to Calvary Chapel as a 'cult.' The Supreme Judicial Court rejected that claim, saying the term appeared while the lower court was summarising testimony from Janja Lalich, an expert whom the parties had stipulated could testify about cults.

Liberty Counsel, the Christian legal organisation representing Bickford, said after the ruling that it plans to ask the US Supreme Court to review the case. Founder and chairman Mat Staver argued that the decision improperly limits a fit parent's ability to raise a child according to her faith.

The organisation also said Bradeen has refused requests for Bickford to take the girl to church services, Bible studies and religious events since the December 2024 order.

Those assertions are Liberty Counsel's account of how the order has operated and were not independently established by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court's published opinion.

Any US Supreme Court challenge would begin with a petition asking the justices to take the case. The court would then decide whether to grant review.