
City fines Montreal church for hosting MAGA-affiliated singer Sean Feucht
Feucht's controversial views and his status as a rising star in the MAGA movement have led officials to cancel his concerts in several Canadian cities in recent days.
But on Friday evening, an evangelical church in Montreal allowed Feucht to perform a hastily scheduled concert over the objections of the city administration, and is now facing a $2,500 fine.
A spokesperson for Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante said the Ministerios Restauración Church in the city's Plateau-Mont-Royal borough did not have a permit to organize a concert, and had been informed that the event could not take place.
'This show runs counter to the values of inclusion, solidarity, and respect that are championed in Montreal. Freedom of expression is one of our fundamental values, but hateful and discriminatory speech is not acceptable in Montreal,' Philippe Massé said in a statement.
'A ticket was issued because the organization violated the regulations by going ahead with the show.'
Protesters gathered outside the church during the concert Friday evening.
Montreal police say they arrested a 38-year-old man for obstruction. They also say a smoke bomb was set off inside the church during Feucht's performance.
Feucht reacted Saturday on social media to the events in Montreal, claiming that two smoke bombs were thrown at his head during the concert.
'Now you want (to) fine the church for doing what the church does - WORSHIP,' he said on X. 'Every Canadian should be embarrassed/concerned with this. No bigger scandal in Canada.'
The church did not respond to requests for comment from The Canadian Press. Feucht was scheduled to perform east of Ottawa in Alfred, Ont. on Saturday afternoon, before moving on to the Toronto area on Sunday.
The Christian singer describes himself as a musician, missionary, author and activist. He has spoken out against 'gender ideology,' abortion and the LGBTQ+ community, and his religious and political views have grabbed the attention of U.S. President Donald Trump's administration.
The Atlantic magazine, based in Washington, D.C., recently described Feucht as a Christian nationalist who has become a 'MAGA superstar.'
'Between praising President Donald Trump as God's chosen one and suggesting that abortion supporters are 'demons,' Feucht has repeatedly advocated for the fusion of church and state,' the article says.
Complaints from residents and planned protests have prompted officials to cancel all six of the concerts scheduled as part of the eastern Canadian leg of Feucht's 'Revive in 25' tour over the last week, forcing him to seek alternate venues.
On Tuesday, Parks Canada announced it had revoked a permit for a performance scheduled at a national historic site in Halifax, citing 'heightened public safety concerns.'
Concerts have since been cancelled in Charlottetown, Moncton, N.B., Quebec City, Gatineau, Que. and Vaughan, Ont.
Feucht announced his Montreal concert venue on Thursday, after his planned Friday show in Quebec City was cancelled. A second spokesperson for Plante said the show was scheduled at the 'last minute without notice.'
The singer says he's the victim of 'Christian persecution,' and is accusing Canada of tyranny and censorship.
'A couple crazy activists started raising up all of this ruckus across Canada, and one by one all of our permits were cancelled out of safety concerns,' he said in a social media video posted Friday night following the Montreal performance. 'Here we are in the middle of a firestorm.'
Feucht still has a series of concerts scheduled in western Canada in August.
On its Spanish-language website, the Ministerios Restauración Church says it has 700 congregants, 'whose lives have been restored and transformed by the work God does through our ministry.'
This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 26, 2025.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
9 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
I fled persecution in Iran. ICE enforcement here today reminds me of Tehran
As a Christian who smuggled Bibles into my home country of Iran, I became a target of the country's Islamist regime, which imprisons and sometimes kills those who invite Muslims to convert. After living under house arrest for two years, I fled as a refugee and was ultimately resettled to the United States. I experienced true religious freedom for the first time in my life in this country, of which I am now a proud, grateful citizen — and that's why I am shocked by the ways that my government is now treating my Iranian congregants, who have been detained by masked officers, separated from their families and threatened with deportation to a country that would kill them for their Christian faith. What I have witnessed gives me flashbacks to Tehran, and I believe that America must be better. Two families who are a part of the Farsi-speaking evangelical congregation that I pastor in Los Angeles have been detained in recent weeks. First, a couple and their 3-year-old daughter, who are in the process of seeking asylum because they fear persecution if they were returned to Iran. They were detained at their court hearing in downtown Los Angeles on June 23. The entire family is now being held in South Texas. The next day, I received a call from a woman in my church. Like me, she had been forced to flee Iran for Turkey when her involvement in Iran's underground churches was exposed. When the woman and her husband found themselves in a desperate situation in Turkey last year, they were not offered the option to fly to the U.S. as resettled refugees as I had been in 2010. Instead, they flew to South America, made a treacherous journey north and waited in Mexico for an appointment they reserved on a U.S. government app, CBP One, to be able to explain their situation to officers of the U.S. government. Once lawfully allowed in with provisional humanitarian status, they found our church — where they could be baptized and publicly profess their faith in Jesus — and legal help to begin their asylum request. They received their work authorization documents and found jobs. Their first asylum hearing in immigration court was scheduled for this September. When President Trump returned to office, however, his administration both suspended all refugee resettlement and canceled humanitarian parole for those who had been allowed to enter via the CBP One app. Many parolees received menacing letters instructing them to self-deport or face prosecution, fines or deportation. But these letters also noted that these instructions did not apply to those who had 'otherwise obtained a lawful basis to remain,' such as a pending asylum application. That's why I was so shocked to receive a call from the woman in my congregation informing me that her husband had been detained by masked immigration officers on the street, just a few blocks from our church. I rushed over and began to film the shocking scene: First he was detained by masked officers, and then she was. I asked if they had a judicial warrant, but if they did, they would not show me. The woman experienced a panic attack and was taken to a hospital but discharged into ICE custody; she is now hours away in a detention center in California. Her husband is in a detention center in Texas. It's not just these two families who are affected. My community of Iranian Christians is terrified of being detained and deported back to Iran, where they fear being killed for their faith. Some have lost jobs because they fear leaving their homes. Others lost jobs because their work authorization, tied to humanitarian parole, was abruptly terminated. I believe that America is better than this. This behavior reminds me disturbingly of what I fled in Iran. But I know that most Americans do not support this, nor do most fellow evangelical Christians: Many evangelicals voted for Trump because he pledged to protect persecuted Christians — not to deport them. While most evangelicals want those convicted of violent crimes detained, one-quarter or less of us say that about other immigrants, and 7 in 10 believe the U.S. has a moral responsibility to receive refugees. I have been overwhelmed by the support of English- and Spanish-speaking sister congregations of our church, by the outreach of Christians from across the country and by a recent biblically rooted statement of many California evangelical leaders. Now, Congress has passed legislation to exponentially increase the funding for detaining and deporting immigrants. Trump's administration has been clear that anyone in the country unlawfully — including more than a million who were here lawfully until his administration abruptly canceled their status — is at risk of deportation. According to a recent study by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity, 80% of those vulnerable to deportation are Christians; some, like those in my church, would likely face death if deported to their home countries. I hope and pray Trump will reverse course on these policies, going after those who genuinely present a public safety threat but having mercy on others, especially those who fled persecution on account of their faith. And until he does make that policy shift, I plead with Congress to pass real immigration reforms that would halt these horrifying detentions and deportations. Ara Torosian is a pastor at Cornerstone West Los Angeles.


Axios
9 minutes ago
- Axios
RFK Jr. reportedly plans to fire preventive care task force
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. plans to oust the 16-member expert panel that makes recommendations for preventive services that insurers must cover fully under the Affordable Care Act, according to reports. Why it matters: About 100 million people get no-cost cancer screenings, counseling and other services under the ACA. But some conservatives have urged Kennedy to replace the current members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, saying they push race and gender ideology on doctors. Kennedy postponed a meeting of the panel scheduled for earlier this month amid speculation in the public health community that he could fire its members. The latest: Kennedy plans to dismiss all the members of the advisory panel because he views them as too "woke," the Wall Street Journal first reported, quoting people familiar with the matter. The Supreme Court last month upheld the structure of the task force in a case surrounding coverage of HIV prevention drugs, ruling that the long-standing panel of volunteer scientists are accountable to the Health and Human Services secretary, who has the power to remove and replace members at will. The case stemmed from a 2020 lawsuit by Christian-owned companies over a task force recommendation requiring them to cover no-cost HIV drugs in their employer-sponsored insurance. Kennedy has already fired all members of the panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on immunization recommendations, removing all 17 of its members and replacing them with handpicked successors.


Time Magazine
10 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
The Chaotic, Fantastical World of Donald Trump's Tariffs
President Donald Trump has vociferously portrayed import tariffs as an instrument of economic policy for rewriting the global trade script in favor of the United States. The sales pitch is alluring: tariffs as a tool to negotiate better terms and extract concessions from trading partners, boost government revenues, eliminate trade deficits, and revive manufacturing jobs on American soil. As is well understood by economists, a country's trade policy, which includes tariffs, is not an important determinant of its balance of trade. Any country's trade surplus or deficit is determined by its macroeconomic conditions, as reflected in the gap between what that country saves and what it invests. The core drivers of trade deficit or trade surplus are fiscal and monetary policies: the government's decisions on taxation and public spending and those by a central bank to influence the money supply and credit conditions. Moreover, import tariffs won't generate the revenues Trump promises as the U.S. negotiates numerous bilateral trade deals. And Trump's pitch of bringing back manufacturing jobs for American workers is wishful thinking. If manufacturing revives in the U.S., those jobs will go to robots; the firms won't be hiring American workers, whose high wages they can't afford. The seductive rhetoric of Trump tariffs hides a combination of contradictions, wishful thinking, and superficial understanding of economics, which sells America a mirage and threatens to weaken the stability of the global trading system. The fault with the numbers Combining economic nationalism with his flair for the dramatic, President Trump christened April 2 as 'Liberation Day' and announced 'reciprocal tariffs' on imports from virtually all countries. The tariff hikes were calculated to eliminate the U.S. trade deficit with each country by reducing its imports by an amount equaling America's current bilateral trade deficit with that country. Then, a 50% discount was applied on the calculated tariffs and the 'reciprocal tariffs' were announced. And a base rate of 10% was put in place to ensure taxation on imports from every country. The tariffs imposed by the U.S. were hardly reciprocal: 46% on Vietnam, whose own average import tariff is 9%; 32% on Taiwan, whose own import tariffs on average are barely 2%; 26% on India, with an average import tariff of 12%; and 25% on South Korea, whose import tariffs average 8%. Foreign exporters alone don't pay for tariffs. The Trump Administration significantly underestimated the impact these tariffs would have on American consumers. The administration's calculations incorrectly assume that American consumers of imports—including American producers who use imported inputs—bear only 25% of the cost of tariffs. But most high-quality studies show that nearly all the cost of tariffs is passed on to these consumers and businesses. If that faulty assumption were corrected, the 'reciprocal tariffs' would have been half their proclaimed rates and much less costly for America's trading partners, its own consumers and import-using producers. Equally important, the Trump Administration overstated the benefits of its tariffs and underestimated their economic costs by neglecting the role of exchange rates and the nature of global supply chains. An increase in tariffs induces exchange rate movements that at least partially offset the effects of the tariffs on the trade balance. American industries rely on global supply chains, and imported inputs are necessary for the production of American exports. Import barriers also act as export barriers and higher import tariffs hobble the competitiveness of American corporations in global markets. Moreover, the Trump Administration has been inconsistent with its stated objective of using tariffs to eliminate their bilateral trade deficits. The administration announced a baseline 'Liberation Day' tariff of 10% even on countries—Australia and Brazil, for instance—with whom the U.S. has a trade surplus. The U.S. generally has a surplus in service trade with many countries but the administration seems to have disregarded it. One of the most important American service exports is higher education but the Trump Administration in this case has displayed blatant disregard for trade balance with its multi-pronged attack on universities and its hostility to international students. Read More: Trump's War on Education Is Driving Academics Like Me to Europe Rattling the global economy Unsurprisingly, the Trump 'reciprocal tariffs' had an immediate negative impact on global stock markets and the U.S. bond market and forced a 90-day pause in their implementation. The administration announced that during these 90 days, the U.S. will be clinching 90 trade deals. The deadline for finalizing bilateral trade deals was extended from early July to August but the likelihood of concluding even a small fraction of the Trump Administration's target of 90 deals by then is remote. Trade deals have been finalized with the United Kingdom in June, with the Philippines and Japan in July. Framework deals with China and Vietnam have been agreed upon, and a mini-deal with India is expected soon. The Trump tariffs shocked the emerging economies, which have benefitted considerably from free trade and globalization over past three or four decades. China, India and Vietnam have experienced phenomenal annual economic growth—six to 10%—and lifted hundreds of millions of their citizens above the poverty line. They are bound to resist barriers on their products entering the massive American market. Economic nationalism and domestic politics impose important constraints on every country. Major economies like China and India have been negotiating trade deals with the U.S. and so far they have strongly resisted being bullied into accepting all of Trump Administration's demands. In fact, they have been quite aggressive in their negotiations with the U.S. and ready to retaliate. Beijing responded to Trump's 145% tariff rate with a 125% tariff rate of its own. After that dangerous escalation in their trade war, the U.S. and China agreed to a temporary truce in May. China reduced its tariffs on American imports from 125% to 10% and the U.S. reciprocated by reducing its tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 55%. In late June, Washington and Beijing arrived at a framework agreement to make their temporary truce more permanent. The U.S. has relaxed restrictions on visas for Chinese students. Beijing has adopted a system of licenses to somewhat ease rare-earth export controls and Washington has lifted some controls on technology-related exports. India is a strategic ally but that doesn't make it a pushover as it negotiates a trade deal with the United States. The considerable political power Indian farmers wield has led New Delhi to refuse the American demand for complete access to the country's agricultural and dairy markets. Washington complained at the World Trade Organization (WTO) of India's protectionism, objecting to its veterinary certification requirements for dairy products coming in. India proposed imposing retaliatory tariffs—that comply with WTO rules—in response to the high steel, aluminum and auto-parts tariffs by the U.S. An interim mini-deal between India and the U.S. is expected to be completed by August to avoid India being slapped with the 'Liberation Day' tariffs. The deal is expected to incorporate the straightforward parts: a reduction in U.S. import tariffs on Indian textiles and apparel from 26% to 10%; Indian tariff reductions on U.S. grown nuts and some fruits. And some reductions on the automotive sector. The trickier questions of food grains and major dairy products are expected to be left out for now. The mini-deal will likely be transformed into a more comprehensive one by late fall. A framework deal with Vietnam, a much smaller country and a strategic partner, has been much more asymmetric than in the case of India and China. The Trump Administration agreed to a reduction in the 'Liberation Day' tariff rate of 46% on Vietnam to a base rate of 20% but it insisted on a 40% tariff rate on transshipped products, aimed mainly at Chinese companies trying to dodge the high American tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. However, it needs to be recognized that in this age of global supply chains a manufacturing hub like Vietnam is likely to be processing inputs imported from other countries. Since 2001, the U.S. and Vietnam had a bilateral trade agreement of very low tariffs, and the new framework deal requires Vietnam to continue with imposing zero tariffs on American exports. The Trump deal imposes substantial costs on Vietnam, one third of whose GDP comes from exports to the United States. Read More: American Health Care Will Suffer Under Trump's Tariffs America, the unreliable Nobody knows what Trump will do tomorrow. The Trump tariffs are creating uncertainty for the American and the global economy. Companies need stability in economic policy to decide on the location and quantum of their investments, on the scale of hiring workers, on building new production capacities, and supply chains. The uncertainty adversely affects output and employment in America and the rest of the world. Most countries negotiating trade deals with the U.S. are aware of Trump's proclivity for reneging on agreements. In his first term, President Trump signed the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement and had the highest praise for it. Trump began his second term by reneging on that deal and announcing high tariffs on Canada and Mexico—offering the rationale of growing fentanyl supply and illegal immigration to the U.S. from both countries, a justification especially flimsy in the Canadian case. Recently, Trump threatened to impose an additional 10% tariff on BRICS countries for their alleged efforts to create an alternative to the U.S. dollar in international transactions. And the U.S. president later also threatened a 50% tariff on imports from Brazil to try to stop the prosecution of his friend and former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. Such threats are illegal under American and WTO laws. Given this uncertain state of affairs, the Liberation Day tariffs might ultimately steer emerging economies toward working on negotiating additional trade agreements with other major economies, in order to ensure a large enough market for their products. By erecting these extremely high tariff barriers and undermining and weakening the WTO, the Trump Administration has seriously damaged the world trading system. Consequently, it might end up pushing the rest of the world away and sowing the seeds of American own isolation and irrelevance.