RLL 62.Pope Francis Meets Nancy Pelosi

Technical Setup and Opening Remarks

You're listening to Radio Luke's Lucid, I'm your host Steve Matthews. Thanks for joining me for episode 62. The title of tonight's episode is Pope Francis meets Nancy Pelosi. Well, thanks for joining me here this evening.

I've been spending a little bit of time getting things set up here and ready to go, you know, doing some of these these podcasts slash live streams. There's a lot of technical stuff I have to get right.

It seems like the last few times I've done that I always forget one thing and I have to shut it down and I have to bring everything back up. Anyway, I actually think I got everything going here. I've got my podcast recorder going, yep that's looking good, and got the live stream looking good there.

I finally got a little better camera. I'd had problems with this camera that I bought. I thought it was gonna be a good camera but it's kind of a cheap camera. So right now I'm using my old, it's actually an old Microsoft camera.

I've had this thing for, I want to say about 11 years, but it still works great and does a nice job with the pictures and so I'll just go ahead and keep using it for now. Anyway, yeah, you know, today, you know, I guess before we launch into our main topic today, I just wanted to say, you know, what an amazing day just weather-wise again here in in Cincinnati.

You know, it was so nice. I woke up this morning when I got up early and it was foggy again. It was in the low 60s. It was foggy out and it's been foggy most of the days this week in the morning. It's pretty intense fog and it seems like it kind of hangs around until nine or ten o 'clock in the morning before it finally all burns off.

I'm not sure why that is, but I guess maybe we've got a lot of moisture. I don't know. But anyway, it's been foggy, but boy, it's just been so nice. I mean, it was just not a cloud in the sky today. It was 81 degrees.

I had a chance to go out and do some bike riding again. So that was nice and, you know, what a beautiful day to ride. You know, it's amazing. You can go out this time of year and ride. And I rode, goodness, I think about 27 miles or so today and I didn't literally did not break a sweat.

You know, and it's just because even though it got up in the low 80s, the humidity is so low. You know, it's just, you know, if I were to do that in the middle of summer, of course, you know, I mean, I'd just have sweat just pouring off of me, but it wasn't like that at all today.

So that was really nice. I had a chance to get up this morning too. The reason I was up early, I had a chance to go to a men's Bible study. And, you know, that's always one of the highlights of my week.

It's such a great thing. And it's really something my church does really right. And I have to congratulate and thank them for that. It's just, it's such a great time, opportunity just to get together with my fellow believers, my brothers in Christ, you know, and to study the word of God and to get to know each other a little bit better, to sing, to pray.

We've been going through 1 and 2 Samuel here over the past year, and we're in 2 Samuel right now. And it's really just, it's very interesting just to go through these books chapter by chapter and just see how, and in particular, we've been, you know, it's the area we've been focusing on for a long time now has been David and David's development, some of the ways that he deals with some of the challenges that he has to face.

And today we were talking about Ispacheth, you know, and he was Saul's son, and he was the sort of the rival king. And I think it was 2 Samuel, I think it's chapter 5, where these two guys come in and they literally kill him on his bed in his own house.

And they behead him and they bring his head to King David. And they think King David's going to give him this great reward. And instead he turns around and he executes them. You know, people just didn't get King David.

You know, they thought that they were doing some great thing. And in fact, they were acting lawlessly and brutally. And King David executed them for their murderous act. And you would think they would have learned from some of his, from some things that went on before, like for instance, that Amalekite came to David and told him, oh, you know, I killed King Saul.

And David, thinking that he was going to get some kind of reward from David because, you know, Saul was David's enemy. And David turned around and executed him. And then, you know, there was that occasion where Joab killed Abner, a rival commander.

And he, David made a great, you know, great lament, lamentation, mourning over the death of Abner. You know, and these guys didn't get that. I mean, you would have thought they would have picked up on that, but they didn't.

And so they bring this head of Ishbosheth and David executes them for their murder. And, you know, David was not someone to rejoice in the death even of people who were his enemies, people that, you know, in the case of Saul, he viewed Saul, he said he was the Lord's anointed, you know, and that the Lord would deal with him.

And, you know, David didn't, he was someone who trusted in God and entrusted in God's providence. And he didn't feel that he had to take matters into his own hands the way, say, a lot of secular leaders would.

You know, I mean, most secular leaders probably would have been happy with guys that brought his rival's head to him, but David was not. You know, David was a man after God's own heart. Anyway, it was interesting to go through some of that.

So I really always enjoy the early morning Saturday Bible study, men's Bible study. But anyway, kind of moving on here, I wanted to talk a little bit today about Pope Francis meets Nancy Pelosi. Now, I had a friend of mine, I'm going to share this little article here.

Let's see, this is from Gab, and I think you can see that there. So this is a posting on Gab from Disclosed TV, and it says, Just in, Jesuit Pope Francis and U .S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi met this morning at the Vatican.

And you can see there's pictures of Nancy and the Pope, and they're sitting here talking, and, you know, everything is wonderful. And there was an article that I found doing a little bit more research on this, and here's a headline.

This is from the New York Post. The New York Post, if you're not familiar with the New York Post, of course, you know, everybody thinks of New York newspapers, you think of the New York Times. But the New York Post is a, I mean, I guess you would call it, you know, fairly a conservative publication, reasonably so, and they do some good journalism.

And here's a story here, and that's by John Levine and Mary K. Ling, I'm not sure how you pronounce the name. But the headline here, it says, Nancy Pelosi meets Pope Francis at Vatican amid abortion controversy.

And so this is a little bit more detail about her meeting with the Pope. And it says here, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi met with Pope Francis at the Vatican Saturday morning amid mounting furor of abortion rights in the U .S.

And the, let's see, close that out there. The papal audience came as Pelosi, a lifelong Roman Catholic, has faced increasing criticism from American bishops for her support of abortion. Now, I personally don't think that the Pope or any of the other, you know, any of the other bishops or cardinals or priests or some of these other people, I don't think they really care about abortion.

I think they care about having the issue. You know, I do think that there are some individual Roman Catholics who do care about abortion, that that really is. And when they talk about abortion and oppose abortion, I think there are individual Roman Catholics who do believe sincerely that abortion is wrong.

And it is wrong. It is wrong. I do think that the Roman Catholic Church, the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has cynically used its opposition to, the supposed opposition to abortion to advance its own agenda.

And one of those ways in which it's used that is to rope in evangelicals, you know, rope in Protestants, you know, because there are a lot of conservative Protestants who oppose abortion, as well they should.

I mean, that's the correct biblical Christian view of abortion. And there's, you know, I think the argument from that scripture is pretty easy to make, that abortion is murder. And I guess Nancy Pelosi has been getting some heat for her defense of abortion.

But I don't think that, I mean, you know, the Roman Catholic Church is not going to do anything to embarrass Nancy Pelosi, just like they're not going to do anything to embarrass Joe Biden. There's been some talk about that because Joe Biden claims to be this, this devout Catholic, or at least a Catholic.

And then, you know, he attends this Jesuit church, run church in Washington, D .C. And he, you know, there was some talk, you know, among U .S. bishops, oh, they're going to withhold communion from him.

And, you know, and this Jesuit church he goes to said, oh, no, we're not going to do that. We're going to, we're going to serve communion to him. In fact, I think the Pope, I don't have it handy here, but I believe the Pope even told them, you know, do not withhold communion from Joe Biden.

And that's very obvious why they would. I mean, Joe Biden's a Roman Catholic. He's their boy in the White House. He's basically the Pope's lackey, if you will, in the United States of America, carrying out, you know, the Pope's political program in the United States of America.

They're not going to do anything to embarrass Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi or any of these other high-ranking Catholic officials. They're way, way too valuable for them to do anything to embarrass them or to, you know, to cast them in a bad light.

It's just not going to happen, you know, and, and it's just a lot of, a lot of phony nonsense. As far as I'm concerned, this, this, you know, rumbling, you know, amongst the people, oh, well, they just support abortion and all that.

No, they're not going to do anything about it. You know, Rome is all about the power. You know, they're, they're not interested in principle. A few things here. And in fact, when you, I guess maybe a few things about, you know, Nancy and, and the Pope, you know, you may recall that the Pope visited the United States in 2015, and he came here in part at the behest of Nancy Pelosi.

And just to show that this was a bipartisan thing, John Boehner, who is a representative from Ohio's Second Congressional District, in fact, literally just the Second Congressional District used to be in the county just north of, just a couple miles north of where I live.

And so, I mean, John Boehner is a local guy, but he's a Roman Catholic, and he actually ascended all the way to being Speaker of the House. So, you know, you had a Republican Roman Catholic, and you had a Democrat Roman Catholic, and they, they both extended this invitation to Pope Francis.

And, and Pope Francis came in 2015, and he even addressed Congress, which is the first time that, that a, that Antichrist has ever come into Congress and lectured Congress. And he lectured the, the congressmen about, you know, their need for taking up the issue of climate change.

And I believe he also lectured them too about the supposed responsibility of the American people to pay for every migrant that wants to come to the United States as well. So, so yeah, he, he had a good time up there lecturing Americans about their supposed duties to enact the, the Roman Catholic Church's political program, all of which is imaginary.

It's, it's a bunch of nonsense. But he certainly didn't, didn't hesitate to, to, to push his agenda. So anyway, let's see. So now, I guess, apparently Nancy's going to, to visit her boss in Rome, by her boss, I'm talking about Pope Francis.

She's going over there to visit her boss in Rome, and I guess, I guess receive instructions, I suppose, is what the purpose of this visit was. So, so Pope Francis can, can tell her what to do. And one of the other things too, if you read down through the end of the article, let's see if we can go down here.

Let's see here. Ah, yes, talking about Joe Biden. It says, Biden, the country's second Catholic president, is scheduled for his own meeting with the Pope in a few weeks when he visits Rome for talks with members of the G20 nations.

So, you know, our president is also going to go over and meet with his boss in Rome. We're talking here about, again, the, the anti-Christ Jesuit Pope Francis. He's going to go over there, and I guess he's going to get his marching orders as well.

Rome's Interference in American Politics

Now, the thing that's always, that's kind of amazing to me about some of this stuff is, is just how open it is. You know, and, and, you know, Rome, you know, what Rome, I think at one time had to kind of do secretly, it just does out in the open.

I mean, it's just in your face. You know, they, they don't even try to hide their interference in, in American politics. And they know that nobody's going to call them to account. I mean, you know, no, no Republicans, no, certainly no Protestant ministers are going to say, hey, what is it you're doing over here?

You know, why are, why are the top government officials in the United States federal government going over and getting private audiences with the Pope? This is a problem. What about the separation of church and state?

But nobody seems to care about that. And they, they just go and they, they do this stuff, these American government officials, and, and the, you know, and, and, and the Roman Catholic Church, and they do this, and they know nobody's going to call them out on this stuff.

Now, what Rome, you know, Rome has been interfering in American politics, at least since the first half of the 19th century, and it very well may be that they started intervening earlier as well. In, in his commentary on Philemon titled Slavery and Christianity, John Robbins wrote this, quote, during the American Civil War, the Pope favored the Confederate government, for they both favored slavery, they both opposed capitalism, and they both favored feudalism.

That is, they were both medieval. The Pope saw the war as a way to end the threat that America, a large, free, Protestant nation, posed to the political ambitions of Rome for world domination, divide and conquer, end quote.

And that's, that's from a note on, on page 11, out of Slavery and Christianity, which, by the way, if you haven't read that, it's a, it's a wonderful commentary on Philemon. And, and I really encourage you to read it.

It's really a, kind of a booklet style, booklet-sized commentary. I mean, you can sit down and read it in one sitting, and it's just brilliant stuff. It was published, it was actually one of Dr. Robbins' later works.

I think it was, I think, if my memory serves me correctly, I think it came out originally in 2007. And it's, it's really a brilliant commentary. I absolutely love that commentary on Philemon. I'd highly recommend it to anybody.

Very readable. And not only is it readable, it's also very profound as well. And it'd be well worth your time to read that. Now, continuing sort of on the subject of Rome's interference in, in American politics, I wanted to read something to you.

This is actually a preface out of a book called Washington, the Lap of Rome, by a gentleman named Justin D. Fulton. It was originally published in 1888. And I'm going to just read from the, from the, the, the preface of this.

Let's see if I can get myself in the right spot here. There, there we go. Okay. And this is just going to be an extended quote here. Quote, Washington in the lap of Rome has been written to call the attention of the American people to the great trust which has been betrayed into the great work which devolves upon them and uncovers facts, which will bring to blood, bring the blush of shame to the cheek of real Republican of the real Republican and fill his soul with indignation.

15 ,000 department clerks are under the surveillance of Rome. If it be not true, as is charged that a private wire runs from the white house in Washington to the Cardinal's palace in Baltimore, and that every important question touching the interest of Romanism in America is placed before his eye, before it becomes a public act, it is true that the Cardinal is a factor in politics.

Romanism is the dominant power in the Capitol of the United States. Lincoln, Grant, and Arthur withstood it and suffered the consequences. The power is unseen. It is shadowy. It inhabits the air and infects it.

Romanism is the malaria of the spiritual world. It stupefies the brain, deadens the heart, and sears the consciences with a hot iron. It comes as did the tempter with gifts in its hands of rule, of power, and of wealth to all who will fall down and worship it.

They who yield have peace and praise. They who refuse must fight a terrible foe. The cry has been for peace. The lips of some of the ministers and members of the Church of Christ have been padlocked. Politicians in the grasp of this power are unable or unwilling to move.

They clank their chains with delight and glory in being allied with an organism so potential and so astute. Others see the peril and withstand its open and determined advance. No longer now is the clash of arms heard.

The city is not to human sight. A camp of armed men is in the days of civil war. But if the eyes could be opened, as were those of the prophet's servant when horses and chariots were circling in the air, proofs of a conflict might now be discerned, more desperate than was ever fought by flesh and blood on earth.

Today, the City of Magnificent Distances resembles a child in the presence of a snake. It is being charmed by the viper. Duty demands that the truth be told which shall break the back of the monster. White-preistered red uncovered the pollutions of Romanism in the hope of saving the women and girls of the Roman Catholic Church, now held in the grasp of superstition.

Washington in the lap of Rome appeals to mankind. The surrender to Rome of the capital of the great republic means death to liberty. The people of all lands and clans are interested in this conflict. The facts given will ripen the indignation of pure-minded men and women against a Jesuitical foe who no longer creeps under the cover or hides in the shadow of some wall, but stalks boldly forth in his errand of wickedness.

It is believed that it will cause lovers of liberty to shake themselves from their lethargy, and not only to take Washington out of the lap of Rome, but throttle the monster in the future of the republic, and lift the nation to its rightful place as the educator of mankind, a leader of the best thought, and a personification of God's great purpose, and placing within the area of an ocean-washed republic a free church and a free state.

May God help the truth is the prayer of Justin D. Fulton.". And again, that was written in 1888. And if things were bad in 1888, that same situation is far worse today. Less than 100 years later, and this is in 1984, so we go from 1888 to 1984, America under President Ronald Reagan established formal diplomatic ties with the Roman Catholic Church State.

And this is something that John Robbins wrote about in his book Ecclesiastical Megalomania. And I'm going to read just a little bit for you of what John Robbins had to say about the United States opening diplomatic ties with Rome.

And he writes this, this is beginning on page 189, quote, few people understand the importance of the Roman Church State in contemporary international affairs. When the United States appointed an ambassador to the Church State in 1984 during the Reagan administration, the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs commented on the diplomatic significance of the Roman Church State in its report on the bill.

And this is a quote from the bill. The Vatican is an important player on the world stage. It maintains diplomatic presence and has wide influence and access to important areas of great interest to the United States, such as Eastern Europe, Central America, Africa, and the Middle East.

Vatican diplomats widely regarded as among the most skilled in the world play an active role in international political affairs. And then he quotes from a book here by Nina Lobello talking about all the spies that the Vatican has.

And Nina Lobello says this, whatever the true figures are for either the CIA or the KGB, neither of them has as many secret agents in the field as the Vatican. And that's kind of an extended quote there, and I won't read the whole thing, but it's quite remarkable to think of Rome as having an army of spies, which they do.

And the, let's see here, just read one more thing here. And then this is from page 191. The only reason the Vatican City is significant is that it is the headquarters of the Roman Church state. The Vatican, just as the Kremlin, was the headquarters of the Soviet Union.

The committee report itself betrays the real intention of the Senate by elsewhere and repeatedly referring to the new United States ambassador as the ambassador to the Holy See, not the Vatican. So, you know, the United States sends and receives ambassadors from Rome, and did not begin doing so until 1984.

And a lot of people objected to that, I think, correctly on the grounds of the separation of church and state, but that didn't hold sway. And, you know, we now have a diplomatic mission to the Vatican.

And in fact, it's interesting in this New York Post article, kind of going back to that, apparently there was rumors that Joe Biden was going to name Nancy Pelosi as the ambassador to the Holy See. You can see right there that that when the U .S. established diplomatic relations with Rome, it's an ambassador to the Holy See.

Let me just read a little bit of this from you. This is from that same New York Post report. Let's see here. Previously, rumors had swirled in D .C. that Biden would nominate Pelosi as the U .S. ambassador to the Holy See.

The speculation was dashed Friday when Biden tapped former Senator Joe Donnelly for the role. So we see right there that the United States has an ambassador to the Holy See. Now, I want to turn back to Fulton's Washington in the Lap of Rome, and there's an interesting section here, and I want to read this from you.

This is, and by the way, Washington in the Lap of Rome, you can get this book. It's actually out on Google Books. I'm going to put a link in the show notes of this. So, I mean, if you want to look at it, you can go out there, you can see it.

It's, as I say, it's right out there in Google Books. It's free access. If you want to, the Adullam Films, that's Christopher J. Pinto's organization, they actually have reprinted a copy of Washington in the Lap of Rome, and it's got a forward by Christian J. Pinto as well.

So if you follow his work, and I think he does some very interesting work, that's one way to support his organization and also get a book that I think, a hard copy of a book that I think is well worth having.

But let me just read a little bit for you. This is, again, from page 73 of Washington in the Lap of Rome. The Christian people of the United States gave Roman Catholics a wide berth. The less they had of them, the better.

The story of the Inquisition was familiar. Washington dreaded foreign influence and never saw but one Roman Catholic in whom he had comfort, the immortal Lafayette. Jefferson, Madison, and others were afraid of the influence attempted to be exerted by the mischievous, persecuting, unreliable association known and designated as the Roman Catholic Church, which to them was, quote, the wicked, the mystery of iniquity, the harlot of the tiber.

So those were all terms that that Jefferson and Madison and others, the founding fathers of the United States, used for Rome. The oppressor, an inhumane foe of the Church of God in all ages and all climes.

Hence, Rome entered Washington as elsewhere as an object of dread. That college in Georgetown, District of Columbia, was regarded as a Jesuit nest. It was let alone by the North and largely by the South.

Then came the convent. Nuns began to appear. Their pious faces, demure appearance, deceived the very elect. The establishments they wanted for elimocenary, that is charitable purposes, went up silently and almost unnoticed.

So, you know, you can see the, you know, and this is going back to, you know, I don't know exactly when George, because it talks specifically here about Georgetown, that college in Georgetown, talking about is George, you know, known today as Georgetown University.

That is a Jesuit school right in the heart of Washington, D .C. in the Georgetown district, which is a kind of a ritzy, well-to-do area of Washington, D .C. And so, I mean, this college has been operating openly right in Washington, D .C. for well over 100 years.

I don't know, 150 years, maybe longer than that. I don't know the exact time it was founded, but I mean, you know, the Jesuits have been a force in Washington since at least, you know, the 19th century, and again, maybe very much earlier.

And this book here, Washington in the Lap of Rome, talks about that. So, this is not a new thing. Now, the influence of Roman American politics advanced far by the 1880s, and this can be seen not only from Fulton's work, you know, Washington in the Lap of Rome, the book I've just quoted from here, but also in people's reaction to Dr. Samuel D. Burchard's famous statement on behalf of Republican presidential candidate James G. Blaine.

James G. Blaine ran on the Republican ticket for president in 1884, and Burchard made a comment in a speech that has become kind of famous and I guess maybe notorious in some circles. Let me just read this for you here.

It says, quote, we are Republicans and don't propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been Rome, Romanism, and rebellion. We are loyal to our flag. Now, the party whose antecedents have been Rome, Romanism, and rebellion, who is that?

Well, that's the Democrats, you know, and I've talked, I've written quite a bit about that over the years in my blog, and that's the full quote right there. That's the really controversial quote, and it really triggered people back in the 1880s.

Burchard's statement, he was widely condemned at the time, and a lot of people say that Burchard's statement actually caused Blaine to lose the election, and I know Blaine kind of tried to run out there and to disavow it, and it's universally condemned today.

I've never seen anyone actually go out and defend Burchard. Well, I've defended Burchard, and maybe some other people have, but most people don't. Usually when you read anything about that particular quote, you know, Sam D. Burchard is said to be a very bad person.

He's not politically correct, but here's the thing, you know, what Burchard said was absolutely right. You know, the Democratic Party has been, at least since the 1880s, and I think much earlier than that, the political home of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, and you can see that today.

I mean, look at who, you know, America has had two Roman Catholic presidents, John F. Kennedy, and now Joe Biden. If you consider him a president, I don't consider him a legitimate president, but he does occupy the office, and he holds that title, and both these Roman Catholic men have been Democrats, and that's not an accident.

You know, it's not an accident that you have a Roman Catholic Democrat as a Speaker of the House. I mean, that is the primary channel for the Roman Catholic Church's political influence in the United States.

It's the Democratic Party. I'm going to go ahead and close that window there, and one of the things that's interesting here is that, in my opinion, it's not an accident that the two times a Roman Catholic's been elected president, both elections were noted for their widespread corruption.

When JFK, John F. Kennedy, was elected in the 1960s, there was a journalist by the name of Earl Mazzo who covered, did some investigative work on the election, the 1960 presidential election. He was a journalist.

He worked for a paper called the New York Herald, and let's see, in a, and this was in a, this is actually was in an interview that was done with him in 2000. What did he say here? Bear with me just a moment.

Oh yeah, this is, this is what Mazzo said in this 2000 interview. This is actually from the Washington Post here, but Mazzo said, there's no question in my mind that it, and he was talking about the 1960 presidential election, was stolen.

It was stolen like mad. It was stolen in Chicago and in Texas, and in my opinion, the 2020 presidential election likewise was stolen like mad, and in particular in Pennsylvania, in Georgia, in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona.

It was stolen, and here we have, you know, the two most notoriously corrupt presidential elections probably in American history, and both times the winner is a Roman Catholic. You know, so who's responsible for, for the steal?

Well, you know, there's this old, you know, it's a, it's a Latin question. I guess sometimes lawyers use this quibono, which in Latin simply just means, you know, who benefits? You know, you ask the question, who benefits?

And that's going to kind of point you in the direction of probably who the perpetrator is, you know, who, who's the perp, you know, who, who pulled off the crime. So who benefits? Well, Rome certainly benefited in both cases, in the case of John F. Kennedy and in Joe Biden, and I think it's reasonable to suspect just on that basis alone that the, that the Roman Catholic church state was neck deep in election fraud in both cases.

But that's not the only reason. I mean, Rome has a long history of election chicanery, and again, I'm going to turn back to John Robbins' Ecclesiastical Megalomania. I want to just read a portion of that from you as well.

And this is beginning on page 46. It'll be in, extending to page 47. There's, at one point here, he's quoting a, yeah, he's quoting Pope Pius XI, who wrote about, he actually wrote this in an encyclical.

This is, yeah, Quadrigra, is an encyclical, encyclical from 1931 by Pope Pius XI. It's called Quadrigissimo Anno. It's the 40th, 40th year, or I guess you call it the 40th anniversary of the writing of a previous encyclical called Rerum Novarum.

And I'm just going to quote you here from, this is again, quoting from Pius XI's encyclical. And he's writing here in 1931. He says this, in fact, the encyclical Rerum Novarum completely overthrew those tottering tenets of liberalism.

And by liberalism, he means what we would today call, you know, laissez-faire economics, limited government. In other words, things that Christians would support. You know, the term liberalism in the 19th century meant something very different than what it does today.

In fact, I have a dear friend of mine in Australia, and we talk about politics a lot. And he told me, this gentleman, he's a brother in Christ. And he told me that in Australia, the equivalent of the Republican Party, which you would call what we would call conservatives, is actually called the Liberal Party.

And the equivalent to the Democrats in Australia is called the Labor Party. So you've got the Liberal Party and the Labor Party. And the Liberal Party is, quote, you know, what we would call today the conservatives.

They're sort of the, again, the equivalent of the Republicans. So when this Pope is talking about the tottering tenets of liberalism, he's not talking about, you know, the big government socialist types that we have today, which is what people mean by liberalism.

He's talking about limited constitutional government and the free markets, capitalism, the things that as Christians that we would support, because, I mean, the Bible teaches limited government in terms of politics, and it teaches capitalism for its economic system.

That's the Christian statement on politics and economics, the Christian position. So let's go back and read that again here. Again, this is Pope Pius XI. In fact, the encyclical Rerum Novarum completely overthrew those tottering tenets of liberalism, which had long hampered effective interference by the government.

It prevailed upon the peoples to develop their social policy more intensely and on truer lines and encouraged the elite among Catholics to give such efficacious help and assistance to rulers of the state, in that legislative assemblies were not infrequently the foremost advocates of the new policy.

Furthermore, not a few recent laws dealing with social questions were originally proposed to the suffrages of the people's representatives by ecclesiastics thoroughly imbued with Leo's teaching, who afterwards, with watchful care, promoted and fostered their execution.".

That's an end quote, ending the quote from Rerum Novarum. And here's John Robbins. He comments on this. He says, Pope Pius XI told us that the encyclical Rerum Novarum was instrumental in ending laissez-faire capitalism in the 20th century by ushering in the area of effective interference by the government.

Leo XIII had encouraged Roman Catholics to influence the various civil governments, and Pope Pius XI told us that they have done so. In fact, they have been the, quote, foremost advocates of the new policy, end quote, of interference.

Indeed, Pope Pius XI disclosed in many cases, not a few, new laws were originally proposed by ecclesiastics, that is, by bishops and priests themselves, who afterwards promoted and fostered the execution.

Pope Pius XI's claims, though they need no confirmation, are corroborated by a column Joe Klein wrote for Newsweek, February 19th, 1996, titled, A Lurch Toward Love, telling us that Pat Buchanan, who at that time was running for president, has got religion.

Klein explained, the religion is Roman Catholicism, the most significant in American politics, the ultimate swing vote. Catholics were the heart of the New Deal coalition. They were the daily machine in Chicago, the curly machine in Boston, Tammany Hall in New York.

Jimmy Carter was the last Democrat to win a Catholic majority. Clinton got 43 of their support in 1992. Perot had 20, at least 37 for Bush. But Catholics voted overwhelmingly, 57 for Democratic congressional candidates.

That's the end of the quote from Joe Klein, and Robbins continues, Much of the interference by federal, state, and local governments in the affairs of citizens, both Joe Klein and the papacy have told us, is due to Roman Catholic influence in American politics.

Corrupt municipal political machines were constructed and operated by Roman Catholics following the church-state's support for a policy of effective interference. Tammany Hall, the daily machine, the curly machine, and so on.

Klein could have mentioned many more. Following Vatican directives, Roman Catholic politicians, legislatures, and intellectuals brought us the progressive movement, the labor union movement, the graduated income tax, the New Deal, and the growth of government in the United States.

End quote. So, you know, one of the things that, you know, and the reason I really, one of the things I wanted you to get out of that is the discussion, the dimension that Joe Klein made and John Robbins made of some of these corrupt political organizations.

You know, the curly machine, that was in Boston. You had the daily machine in Chicago. You had the Tammany Hall in New York. And Earl Mazzo, the fellow that was covering the 1960 presidential election, he talked about, he said they stole it.