Off The Record with Roma Downey

March 05, 2014

The Glenn Beck Program

Over the last several months, Glenn has emphasized the importance of bringing together individuals who share the same goals and unifying principles so that we can learn from one another. GlennBeck.com is working to fulfill that goal by sitting down with some of the most interesting minds to give you an inside look at who they are and what they are working on.

Last month, Emmy award winning actress and producer Roma Downey spoke with GlennBeck.com assistant editor Meg Storm about her childhood growing up in war torn Ireland, the lack of Christian content coming out of Hollywood, and why people are responding so strongly to The Bible and Son of God.

Below is a transcript of the interview:

Hi, Roma! How are you?

Great! I am in Houston today.

How nice! I am actually in New York, but Glenn is down in Dallas.

Are you freezing in New York?

(Laughs) We are. We have a lot of snow on the ground right now.

Well, be safe!

Thank you! Before we dive into the Son of God questions, I just wanted to ask you a few things about your background. Were you always interested in the entertainment industry?

When I was in high school, I thought I might be an artist. I was very good at drawing and painting. I have always been someone who expresses themselves in an artistic way. I grew up in Northern Ireland. I grew up during the war. There weren’t a whole lot of opportunities to act. The local cinema had been burnt down, and the theater company had been blown up. My growing up wasn’t exactly conducive to figuring out that’s what I wanted to do. But once I started college and got involved in drama, it was clear that I loved that as a form of expression. I have had a great and enjoyable acting career, and now I am enjoying a great second act in my career as a producer.

How did you get your start in the industry – you said it was in college?

Yes, I came up through the theater. I came out of drama college and started working in the professional theater. I did a play with the Abbey Theater, which is Ireland’s national theater company. We brought that play to America. My dream had been to appear on Broadway, which I was able to do – I think it was 1990 or 1991 in a show called The Circle at the Ambassador Theater on 49th Street in New York City. And I also had the opportunity to work at the New York Shakespeare Festival with the Roundabout Theater Company. I had a classical training with Shakespeare, Shaw, Chekov, and so on.

And then I found myself getting cast in roles for television. I moved to Los Angeles on the heels of a mini-series I was in. I starred as Jackie Kennedy in a series called A Woman Named Jackie, which went on to win the Emmy that year. I was just in Los Angeles a few years when I cast to play the angel in Touched by an Angel.

How did you and Mark first meet?

We met just a little over 10 years ago now. We met in Malibu. I was having a manicure/pedicure. My husband was having a haircut. Our eyes met in the mirror – not once, not twice, but three times. And on the third time, having been caught looking over at him, I swore I would not look back. And he left – he took off in his car. We didn’t speak. When I was paying my bill, I was very discreetly trying to ask the receptionist who he was. And she said, "Oh isn’t that interesting that you are asking me who he was because he just asked me who you were!"

Oh my goodness!

So anyway, a few days later he got my phone number and called. And I guess the rest, as they say, is history.

That is such a great story – especially on Valentine’s Day! You were talking about how you have an extensive theater background and TV and movies and now you are behind the camera as well. Do you enjoy doing all of it equally?

Yes, I do. You know for many years, when I was starring on Touched by an Angel, I produced on a number of television movies for CBS. I have always enjoyed the aspect of bringing something together and multitasking in that way.

In the case of The Bible series and now Son of God, it has been a combination of what I love to do and what I believe. To be able to do that with the person I love has just really been a blessing. It has been the most challenging work and the most rewarding work. It was quite an undertaking to realize our Bible as a television series. We knew that came with a huge responsibility to bring the scripture to the screen – one that we took very seriously. We worked with scholars and theologians and faith leaders to refine the story, to tell the story accurately, to make sure that we brought the story to life and always kept true to the story of the book.

With Son of God, there is such an excitement and buzz growing. It opens on February 28, and we have been traveling across the country seeing a movement growing. Churches, I think, see what a resource the film is to visually bring the gospels to the screen. Jesus hasn’t been on the big screen in 10 years. That was Passion of the Christ, which only showed three days in Jesus’ life where Son of God is the narrative of Jesus’ life from the nativity and our Christmas story right through to his death but then his resurrection and ascension. The movie goes right through to the Commission. And I think the churches are seeing what a beautiful gift it is. They are stepping up and buying out the multiplexes around the country and giving the seats to their communities and youth groups and so on. So it has been very encouraging to be here in the middle of the south of the country and see what is happening.

You saw the great success of The Bible miniseries last year. Do you think there is such a void in the industry for content like this? Do you think people are really responding because there aren’t other options?

I think that’s true. I also think it speaks to a greater surge that people have. They are hungry for God and hungry for hope. When we first started working on The Bible series, I know that many in our industry thought we were fools, that nobody would show up, that nobody would be that interested in seeing Bible stories on the screen. Of course, we now know that one hundred million people showed up. The Bible series continued to ripple around the world with such success in countries that are surprising like Hong Kong and Australia – places that you might not think would have a huge interest or appetite for faith filled stories.

I think that part of our intention always was – it’s not enough to have good intentions, to bring the stories to the screen. We knew the stories had to be brought with excellent production value and told in a way that would be gritty and compelling and engaging and emotionally connecting. Ultimately, I think it was that that people responded to. Yes, they are good stories. But they are good stories well told.

So you filmed Son of God around the same time you filmed the first season of The Bible?

Oh, yes, absolutely! Every Friday night we would screen footage over there in Morocco. We had an editor on location with us. We would invite our cleaning team, our stars – everybody who worked on the movie had an open invitation to come to these screenings. It gave us an opportunity to see the work from the week that we had just completed, and it allowed everyone to feel like they were part of the team.

At one of these screenings, the Jesus narrative began to unfold, I turned to Mark and said, “Wow, Mark. This is really good. I wish we could be making a film.” And he said, “Well, why don’t we? Let’s shoot additional footage and have the editors start putting something together.” So it took about a year to get the movie edited. We had additional footage. We had a reedited form of the series footage. We have been able to present it in this cinematic way – in this stand-alone theatrical experience. And it is so different. It is so beautiful and impactful.

The feedback we are getting is people are enjoying the larger than life experience. They are enjoying seeing it in community with others. And you really get to see the scale of it and the full epic, sweeping stories with visual effects, special effects. It’s moving. It’s inspiration. And at the same time it’s this deeply personal, intimate love story. People are being profoundly moved by it.

I have seen some clips, and it so incredibly powerful the way you were able to translate these stories that have become so familiar because they are so iconic. But then to see them told in such a way is really something special.

The characters of the disciples – we wanted to cast them as a youthful group, as a dynamic group. They didn’t know they were in the Bible. They were just real guys living their lives. They didn’t even know that Jesus really was the Son of God until he rose. I think it’s the telling of the story in a very human way, in a very relatable way to people. The story is asking them to consider the stories in a new way. It’s a fresh telling. I think the movie will really touch people hearts.

I recently read that The Bible was picked up for a second season, this time on NBC. Is that correct?

Yes, we are doing a mini-series for NBC. We have a green light for 12 hours – for the first 12 hours. And it’s called A.D. The story will reset at the crucifixion and tell the story of the 11 disciples and the fear and the danger and the hope of those dark days when Jesus had died and then the beginnings of the early church.

We are currently working on those scripts, and we plan to be filming that new series back in Morocco by the end of this year, with the hope that it will be on television in the fall of 2015. So we will have had The Bible on TV in 2013, Son of God in theaters in 2014, and A.D. on television in 2015.

It’s been exciting and creative days for us. We must be the noisiest Christians in Hollywood!

That’s wonderful. Well, I look forward to seeing it. Thank you so much for time, Roma! It was a pleasure speaking with you.

We appreciate your help in getting the word out to everybody that Son of God is coming in English and in Spanish too. Thanks, Meg. Bye, bye.

Son of God is now in theaters nationwide. Watch the trailer of the film below:

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep