A Final Rise in Papal Power  

Though Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 provides invaluable insight as to when the end will come and what signs would tell His coming is near; God has opened other astounding clues throughout the Bible to make it precisely clear. Jesus Himself only partially answered the disciples’ questions but referred them back to Daniel 8-12. Daniel, in turn, refers us forward to Revelation.

For many of the final events to occur, it will be necessary for the "little horn," the "sea beast" (the papacy) to rise to a controlling influence in the world. In fact, Gabriel told John:  “. . . and they [world] worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?  “. . . and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” Revelation 13:4,7.

These two verses are extremely instructive. There is more than an “influence” that it refers to. It reveals a power that will be of global extent. It states it will cross ethnic, tribal, family and national barriers. That power will be accompanied by great authority (vs 2). The world will love it because the angel said, “all the world wondered after the beast.”

In the course of world events many things must transpire to make this happen. It is easy to look at the helpless state of the world when facing calamities, impaired moral tone and weakened world trade, and see them as the three main issues which will lead to the Sunday laws, concluding that “that’s how the papacy will rise to power.” There are noted "prophetic happenings" that must transpire first.

Note the earth beast, [United States] “causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [papacy]” (vs 12). That, too, refers to a global power. Papal history reveals that most of its treacherous power was wielded through sympathetic civil power. Since the Bible says that that civil power would be the United States, there must be a cohesive move of events to make this possible.

Here are six things that are beginning to occur which must be fully in place for Revelation 13 and 17 to be fulfilled:  

1.   The world community must have political ties to the papacy.

2.   The Vatican must have an expressed desire to be a world power.

3.   The papacy must be seen as an honorable power by the world community.

4.   The world must be receptive to spiritual revival.

5.   A framework for globalization must be in place with the United States’ support.

6.   The United States must centralize its power.  

Now let's look at each one of these things.

The World Community Must Have Political Ties to the Papacy  

Shortly after the papacy became a church-state power in the 6th century, Rome began to send emissaries to special civil ceremonies and religious events throughtout Europe. Then:

“In the mid-15th century, permanent papal representation began to appear and by the 16th century, history records the establishment of apostolic nunciators in different countries, with an exchange of representatives between those countries and the Holy See. The very first apostolic nunciature was established in Venice in 1500.[1]

During the latter part of the 18th century, international ties became weakened. When the French Revolution broke out and the pope was shortly thereafter taken prisoner in 1798, a low point in diplomatic relations occurred. Major changes came into the Catholic Church over the supervening decades, including Vatican I and the decision to declare the pope’s words infallable over certain declarations.

Then a transitional team came to power in Rome. Antiprotestant Pope Benedict XV reigned from 1914-1922. Though trained in the Vatican’s diplomatic service, his diplomacy efforts to bring peace to waring nations in World War I was a total failure. The Italian government spied on the Holy See, and mistrust of the Roman Catholic Church was deep around the world. Two things quickly and dramatically changed this. Benedict’s closest advisor was Cardinal Gasparri. He became the secretary of state with the next pope, Pius XI. Benito Mussolini seized power in Italy. He immediately saw the importance of a relationship with the Vatican.[2]

Gasparri with his advisors and Mussolini with his representative worked out a diplomatic agreement. In 1929 the Lateran Treaty was signed, giving the Vatican statehood. Thus, it became a church-state. Within weeks exchange of ambassadors began. All this was part of the genius of Gasparri and Pope Pius XI. This was a  significant step towards the healing of the wound of one of the beast heads.

“At present, there are 170 countries maintaining diplomatic relations with the Vatican. To these must be added Russia, Switzerland and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which maintain relations with the Apostolic See through private agreements.

“The Holy See is determined to maintain cordial and official relations with all countries. Over the last few months the press has informed on the efforts the pope’s representatives have made, with greater or lesser success, to establish Nunciatures in China, Vietnam, and North Korea.”[3]

Throughout most of the world the Vatican has diplomatic ties that are open and peaceful. “Who is able to make war with him?” (vs 4). No one. They are at peace and see the pope as a symbol of peace.  

The Vatican Must Have an Expressed Desire to be a World Power  

From the arrest of Pope Pius VI in 1798 the papacy became a vacillating power of weakness. In 1867 the United States withdrew its last representative. In 1870 it lost all of its papal states to Italy. A pivotal change in ideology soon came that set the agenda for world domination.

“With the loss of the Papal States in 1870 and the later accession of Leo XIII, the church began its adjustment to the modern world. Gradually, church leaders gave their blessing to a new reformist agenda or aggiornamento which received worldwide ecclesiastical approbation in the Second Vatican Council. In place of “concordat Christianity,” [characterized by legal treaties which national states guaranteed Catholic privileges, usually in return for ecclesiastical political support] the papacy emphasized human rights, including freedom of religion.”[4]

This was a major turning point for the papacy. At a time of enormous weakness and with little bargaining power, it began a  propaganda  move for human “rights” which could bring little criticism from the world community. Leo XIII’s genius was profound. Much of the ideological shift was adopted for implementation by the Second Vatican Counsel.

Why did this occur? It was the first step in world control and contributed to the healing of the wound. What the Roman church accomplished during the Middle Ages in a small way, it plans to accomplish now on a global scale. Even as the Vatican image began to herald freedom of religion, conscience and right, Leo XIII wrote an encyclical in 1885 called Immurtale Dei, in which he said, “To exclude the church, founded by God Himself, from the business of life, from the power of making laws, from the training of youth, from domestic society, is a grave and fatal error.”[5]

At the time of the Lateran Treaty in 1929, Pope Pius XI had a Jesuit psychoanalyst help lay the ground work for a Catholic dominated world. At that time infiltration and control of America was to be the first step.

“To realize that the Church, under Pius XI’s superb leadership has become a world power again, it is only necessary to glance over the map of Europe and to estimate fairly and frankly the status and influence of the church in the more important countries of that Continent.   . . .

“He believes that the destiny of the Church will be fulfilled in America and that with the spiritual conquest of America the world-dominion of the Church will be regained.”[6] [That’s exactly what Revelation 13 prophecied!]

“The Catholic Church has never given up the hope to re-establish the medieval union of church and state, with a global state and a global theocracy as its ultimate goal.”[7]

“The Roman Catholic-State in the twentieth century, however, is an institution recovering from a mortal wound. If and when it regains its full power and authority, it will impose a regime more sinister than any the planet has yet seen.”[8]

The late Malachi Martin, former Jesuit, made an explosive impact on secular and religious thinkers when he published Keys of This Blood in 1990. A subtitle to the book – Pope John Paul II verses Russia and the West for Control of the New World Order. With Russia by the wayside, it is the United States verses the papacy. But, prophecy states they will work together – as of old – the civil state carrying out the wishes of the Vatican.

“On his trip to Poland in 1979, barely eight months after his election, he signaled the opening of the millennium endgame. He became the first of the three players to enter the new geopolitical arena. [p. 23]

“Now he had served notice that he intended to take up and effectively exercise once more the international role that had been central to the tradition of Rome, and to the very mandate Catholics maintain was conferred by Christ upon Peter and upon each of his successors. [p. 22]

“John Paul is convinced neither ‘East’ nor ‘West’ can succeed of itself in creating a geopolitical structure; and this is so mainly because, before any definitive moves in such an effort are made, the condition of all the major players will be severely modified by an act of God. [p. 455]

“He would endow his papacy with an international profile and, as pope, move around among world leaders and nations, vindicating a position for himself as a special leader among leaders, because in that competition he plans to emerge as the victor. [p. 480]

“He is waiting, rather, for an event that will fission human history, splitting the immediate past from the oncoming future. [p. 639]

“His ministry as the Servant of the Grand Design will then begin. His strength of will to hold on and continue, and then, when the fissioning event occurs, to assume that ministry, derives directly from the Petrine authority entrusted solely to him the day he became Pope, . . .” [p. 639].[9]

Does the papacy want world control? It’s their passion. The Bible says, with the dragon’s help, they will get it. But – it will only be for a short time.

“. . . the Roman Church is far-reaching in her plans and modes of operation. She is employing every device to extend her influence and increase her power in preparation for a fierce and determined conflict to regain control of the world.”[10]

The Papacy Must be Seen as an Honorable Power by the World Community  

Ever since Vatican II, where Protestants were invited to observe and participate in Roman Catholic Church administrative deliberations, the long held anti-Catholic spirit in America has been decidedly melting away. That changing spirit cuts across the religious as well as the secular world cultures.

Pope John Paul II came to power in 1978. Immediately, he declared the world as his parish. He set out on a mission to convince the world he is a political and religious leader with ties to everyone’s “back yard.” Since then he has traveled to over 120 countries and millions of people have made pilgrimages to see him.[11]  In those travels he has challenged communist leaders, set foot inside an Islamic mosque, been the guest of presidents, prime ministers, orthodox church leaders and attended the Catholic faithful. One appearance in Mexico drew 1.2 million people. The message of the pope?

“[The church] speaks to the human heart and magnifies the voice of human conscience. She seeks to educate and ennoble people so that they accept responsibility for themselves and for others. In the context of the community of nations, the church’s message is simple yet absolutely crucial for the survival of humanity and the world: The human person must be the true focus of all social, political and economic activity.”[12]

How has the world responded to the pope? Perhaps the most noteworthy example of papal power and diplomatic skill came when President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II met on June 7, 1982. They agreed to work on a clandestine plan to bring down communist eastern Europe. It worked! In fact, so well the Soviet Union came apart. Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev later said:

“Everything that happened in Eastern Europe in these last few years would have been impossible without the presence of this pope.”[13]

Very cordial ties developed in the late 1980’s between Gorbachev and the pope. They remain strong to this day. Intriguingly, they both share common sociological ideologies. The papacy feels church and state should be united – so does Gorbachev.

In 1995 Time Magazine made Pope John Paul II “Man of the Year.” They said, “John Paul’s impact on the world has already been enormous, ranging from the global to the personal. Beyond visits to countries where the Catholic faithful live and worship, the world leaders have found visiting him expeditious. This has included Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, South Korean President Kin Dae-Jung, Abdullah bin Addulaziz Al Saud, vice-prime minister and heir apparent to the throne of Saudi Arabia, Russian President Boris Yeltsin, Croatian President Franjo Tudjman, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, Jordan’s King Abdullah, former South African President Nelson Mandela, Irania President Mohammad Khatami, and Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri, and the list goes on and on. He has been wooed by Jewish rabbis and his counsel sought for by Islamic leaders and, most intriguingly, by a growing number of Protestant ministers.

  Young people are electrified when watching the pope. As this goes to press, over 35,000 youth have registered to attend a Youth Summit at the Vatican in 2002.

Perhaps no American President has sought more to learn from the Roman Catholic Church than President George Bush. During the campaign he was taught in depth regarding the doctrine of common good. Bush adopted its rhetoric repeatedly before and after his inauguration. Bush has frequently said he “respects the Holy Father and what the church teaches.” He has made it clear he wants to have a personal and professional relationship with the Pope.[14]

The world wonders after the pope. Catholic William F. Buckley Jr., editor-at-large of The National Review, said after describing the ravages of John Paul II’s physical afflictions:

“The cumulative result of it all is a stoop and the listless expression on his face–the hangdog look. But then intermittently the great light within flashes, and one sees the most radiant face on the public scene, a presence so commanding as to have arrested a generation of humankind, who wonder gratefully whether the Lord Himself had a hand in shaping the special charisma of this servant of the servant of God.” Time Magazine, “Leaders and Revolutionaries – Pope John Paul II”[15]

Perhaps one of the most significant evidences of the biblically predicted partnership of the two beasts came on January 8, 2001. A bipartisan delegation of Senators and Representatives flew to Rome and presented Pope John Paul II a Congressional Gold Medal of Honor. Spokesman Senator Sam Brownbach said:

“Pope John Paul II is said to be the most recognized person in the world, having personally visited tens of millions, in almost every continent and country,   . . . He has been one of the greatest pastoral leaders of this century. . . . More than any other single person this century, Pope John Paul II has worked to protect the rights of each individual. John Paul II has also addressed almost every major question posed by the modern mind at the turn of the millennium.”[16]

The World Must be Receptive to a Spiritual Revival  

Back in 1995 a movement began among Christian students toward spiritual revival in colleges (religious and secular) across the nation. Many students  lived with deep anxiety behind a facade of imagined strength they longed to shed. In those meetings open confession brought freedom and a true foundation for a true walk with Jesus.

Tim Beougher, professor of evangelism at Wheaten College, Illinois, said, “‘I’ve studied revivals and awakenings for 15 years. This bears all the marks of being deep and genuine work of God.’ There was no emotional exuberance, just the quiet reverent working of His Spirit.”[17]

In 1998 a significant conference was held in Wellesley College in Massachusetts. Representatives from Harvard, Jewish, Muslim, Unitarian, Hindu, Buddhist, Hahai and Christian schools met to talk of the educational challenge of students wanting to enroll in more spiritually related classes. Out of that a major study is underway to meet the spiritual needs individually and academically of students in secular and religious schools. The work will end mid-2002.

Victor Kazanjian, Episcopal priest and head of the office of Religious and Spiritual Life at Wellesley College said:

“. . . A ‘religious vacuum’ has existed on campuses because religion has been seen as divisive, a minefield that made administrators nervous, Kazanjian said. But when higher education ‘appropriately rid itself of the constraints of institutional religion,’ what also was lost was ‘any notion of the spiritual dimensions to learning,’ he said.

“. . . Students are inherently spiritual, he said. They have told him story after story of ‘moments of being awakened to some realization, whether it was in the study of a cell and suddenly seeing the organic, the life of all things; whether it was a moment of enlightenment reading part of a poem in their English class; or the wonder of a piece of African art.’

“. . . He expects that the new trend will be to allow students of various faiths to talk freely about and worship God and that ‘themes of common humanity’ that emerge will ‘bind us together.’”[18]

There has been crescendoing voices within congress speaking out for moral values. J.C. Watts said, “You don’t have to be ashamed, to talk about Christ in public forums. You shouldn’t be, and I’m not.”[19]

Adventists, Evangelicals, Charismatics and other Protestant denominations are seeing the work of God’s Spirit in country after country. Fascinating openings to proclaim the name of Jesus in Hindu and Muslim areas are cracking open. This we must expect. The final moves will be rapid, and it is clear, at the very end, though barriers of unprecedented magnitude will arise, the final spread of the gospel will go everywhere effectively. It is not uncommon to see crusades all over the world attract 5000 to 100,000 people.

“According to an in-depth national report released today, a large US majority wants religion’s influence on society to increase. . . .  Americans’ most immediate concern is how to remedy the moral deficiencies they see persisting in society – deterioration in family structure, declining civility and respectfulness, and rising materialism. Some 69 percent see more religion as ‘the best way to strengthen family values and moral behavior.’ They also expect it would lead to a decrease in crime and greed. . . . President-elect George W. Bush has made this a priority’. . .

“‘We are seeing that there is going to be a renegotiation of this boundary between church and state,’ Rabbi Kula says.”[20]

A fascinating swing in religious interest occurred the day the World Trade Center was destroyed. Reuters reported:

“Religion is back in fashion as a bewildered world turns to God in the wake of the suicide plane attacks on U.S. Cities and churches, mosques and synagogues do their best to provide spiritual solace and guidance.

“It has been standing room only at memorial services around the globe by all faiths for the victims of the September 11 attacks, and church and synagogue attendance has shot up after years of decline.

“‘This is a moment of cultural identity crisis,’ said Ali Schutz, a respected member of Milan’s Muslim community.

“Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo led some 2,000 worshippers on Wednesday in prayers for world peace recited by both Christians and Muslims. The Philippines is Asia’s only Christian country and has a minority Muslim population.

“‘A lot of people who don’t normally go to church are now coming and asking how could this happen, what does it mean,’ said Beth Ferris, the executive secretary for international affairs at the Geneva-based World Council of Churches (WCC).

“‘People always turn to religion in times of crisis. But this time it is more powerful because of the nature of the attacks and the feeling it could happen anywhere, coupled with a belief the world has changed in ways people can’t understand.’”[21]

On October 28, 2001, the Roman Catholic Newspaper, Our Sunday Visitor (p. 3), answered the question, Why Catholics were feeling good about the U.S. government. They said it is now because moral leadership is coming from the federal hub of the United States. 

Framework for Globalization Must be in Place with United States’ Support  

For decades a multiplicity of organizations have been working on plans for a New World Order. During the gulf war President Bush, after creating a military coalition of world powers, said the “New World Order has begun.”

In 1995 at the first Gorbachev State of the World Forum, Zbigniew Brezezinski, former national security advisor to President Carter and director of the Trilateral Commission said, “Finally I have no illusions about world government emerging in our lifetime!”[22]

Five years later the U.N. has a constitution in place to rule the world, the international criminal court has begun preliminary work, a system for global taxation is ready to be implemented (Tobin tax), a world economic system is in place through the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, a global belief system has been developed by Hans Kung (German Roman Catholic theologian) and accepted by the United Religions Initiative. It represents a system called “The World-Global ethics.”

With all this in place, organizations like the Nature Conservancy, World Bank, Earth Counsel, NNEP and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (with many major members in the New York Stock Exchange) are strongly opposed to national sovereignty.[23]

The Gorbachev Foundation, which sponsors the State of the World Forum, met in September 2000 and supported the position that nations should have only a limited sovereignty base with the U.N. [and perhaps the papacy] should have vastly expanded powers.[23]

On March 29, 2001 Pope John Paul II issued a warning to an Austrian audience but for the ears of the world: “There are dangers in excessive nationalism.” He said there needs to be a ‘globalization of solidarity.’[25] The following month the pope met with Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the U.N., and expressed his mutual dream for a global world.

What does an agency that wants to control the world do to accelerate the process? Criticize the U.N. Autin Ruse, President of Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute said last year:

“VISITOR: Is there anything good going on at the United Nations?

“RUSE: I think the United Nations is bungling a lot of things. They’re supposed to be a deliberative body that debates issues, settles border disputes and puts together massive relief operations.

“But they have gone very far off the rails in trying to direct the private lives of every man, woman and child on earth. So it’s hard for me to look past that to the good things they may be doing.”[26]

Then “Father” Michel Schooyans, professor emeritus of Louvain University, Belgium, wrote an essay on globalization. It was geared to power posture for the Vatican. He said that for the church, she cannot but rise up against such a globalization that implies a concentration of power that hints of totalitarianism.[27] What he didn’t say was that it is the Holy See’s wish to have the Catholic Church be that totalitarian power – not the U.N.

Pope John Paul II had his own globalization summit at the Vatican May 2, 2000, at the “Workers’ Jubilee.” Two hundred businesses and union leaders from around the world were present, including John Sweeney, president of the U.S. AFL-CIO. The pope said, “‘. . . that globalization has started the nations down ‘a commendable road of co-responsibility . . . that must be reinforced, “globalized,” so that all countries feel involved. It is a road of commitment that, precisely for this reason, exalts the responsibility of each and every person.’”[28]

What kind of control does the pope really want? The pope said, “The Church has the right to criticize a country’s laws and institutions when they go against the moral law . . .”[29]

Former New York Democratic governor suggested in December 2000 that Al Gore should take his battle to the Electoral College. Msgr. Michael J. Wremn, pastor at Cuomo’s Eastside Parish, St. John the Evangelist Church advised Cuomo he was out of place. Cuomo was given a stern warning to backpeddle what he said. The then Archbishop Edward M. Egan (now  Cardinal) supported Wremn’s letter.[30]

July 4, 2001, a legal appeal was given to Pope John Paul II to excommunicate pro-abortion lawmakers.[31]

Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani of Lima, Peru said that they will expect excommunication if they support the pro-abortion stance.

A globalization framework is in place with intriguing, controlling pressure of civil leaders being tested by the Catholic hierarchy.  

The United States Must Centralize Its Power  

Through the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health and Human Services, the federal government micromanages right down to the individual citizen. This new federalismcame over the past 60 years.

Recently, William A. Niskanen, chairman of the Cato Institute, said in an interview with Insight magazine:

“There’s been . . . development which I find very disturbing and that has been a progressive grant of authority from Congress to the regulatory agencies. Congress passes regulatory legislation with the most general language in it and then turns over the effective rule-making to the regulatory agencies.”[32]

That is a mounting problem which creates a massive regulatory network that is out of the realm of judicial and legislative law but in the police power of administrative law.

Since we are clearly told that the Sunday laws will be initiated at the federal level, it is most valuable to study the erosive moves being made by the government which invades privacy, restricts rights and  micromanages everyday life.

“Our founders thought highly of republican government – after all, they worked extremely hard to make one. And they knew then that making any government was like lighting a controlled burn in the middle of a country of bone-dry brush – the only way to fend off an uncontrolled and deadly fire is to light a controlled one . . .

“Even a controlled burn has its dangers, however. And our founders worried that even the government they so carefully crafted could escape the control of the people. They worried about tyranny, about government escaping from its real purpose, as the people’s instrument of self-government, and becoming the instrument of a faction or private interest.”[33]

There is a major philosophical switch in the meaning of the governance of freedom. This has been discussed before in this magazine but is summarized very well by Terry L. Neal, a highly respected financial consultant.

“The alarming increase in citizen control laws has been achieved under . . . cover . . . The assault on personal rights, including privacy, is always justified with convincing arguments about the common good and how the state is ‘improving’ the quality of the protection it provides its citizens. On closer examination one may observe that the ‘common good’ always coincidentally happens to benefit the political concepts of the politicians in power and that the individual’s loss of personal power is transferred to the bureaucracy.”[34]

September 11, 2001, made a monumental change in the psyche of Americans. There has never been a time in our history that the citizenry has been willing for the federal government to centralize its power more. Before the anti-terrorist bill was signed, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said on October 26, 2001: As for new police powers, “a new era in America’s fight against terrorism, made tragically necessary by the attacks of September 11, is about to begin.”[35] That same day, October 26, 2001, President Bush signed into law the anti-terrorism Bill.

There is talk of creating a law that would skip jury trials for terrorist culprits. Could that happen to minority Christians who were blamed for calamities and social ills? Revelation 13 makes it clear that those who don’t have the mark of the beast will not be able to buy or sell. That means they will have restrictions on access to and the use of their money. The new anti-terrorism legislation has surveillance provisions to identify any individual’s monetary status.[36]

In the past it was unthinkable that such regulatory control and invasion of privacy would occur. But, it is here. The psychodynamics of relinquishing freedom and convenience for protection is now acceptable to the majority of the U.S. population. There are only two steps more to a type of power that brings harm comes. 

(1) The acceptance of a worship day ethic and (2) laws to punish those who reject its demands.

“Common Good” is a Roman Catholic situational political ethic. It is captivating the minds of our country’s leaders. It is part of our president’s new way of thinking. He has been instructed in this in great detail. Soon – very soon – it will be the propelling “reason” for religious laws that will announce that the final moves leading to the close of probation will have begun.

What is happening is profound and apocalyptic.

Jesus said, “And what I say unto you I say unto all, watch.” Mark 13:37. Paul remarked, “Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.” I Thessalonians 5:6.  

References (emphasis supplied unless otherwise noted):

  1. www.chivalricorders.org/vatican/vaticdiphtm.

  2. Inside the Vatican, Oct. 2001.

  3. Zenit, March 1, 2000.

4. Erico Hanson, The Catholic Church in World Politics (Princeton University Press; Princeton, NJ), 1987, p. 120.

  5. Immurtale Dei, 1885, p. 22.

  6. E. Boyd Barrett, Rome Stoops to Conquer (Julian Messner, Inc., New York), 1935.

  7. Ayn Rand, Requiem for Man, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, p. 315.

  8. John W. Robing, “World Government” in Ecclesiastical Megalomania (The Trinity Foundation) 1999, p. 195.

  9. Malachi Martin, The Keys of This Blood (Simon and Schuster, New York), 1990.

10. The Great Controversy, p. 565.

11. Religious News, 3/24/2000 and ABC News, Oct. 2001.

12. Pope John Paul II’s address to the 50th session of the U.N. General Assembly; Oct. 5, 1995.

13. ABC News, Oct. 1995.

14. Our Sunday Visitor, Aug. 5, 2001, p. 3.

15. (cgi.pathfinder100/leaders/profile/popejohn3.html).

16. Zenit, Jan. 6, 2001.

17. Christianity Today, 5/15/1995.

18. Religion Today, Feature Article, Oct. 9, 1998.

19. Chrisma, Nov. 1977, p. 42.

20. The Christian Science Monitor, www.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/01/10/p351.htm.

21. Reuters – Asia – Article 67842.

22. Joan Veon, Changing the Global Rulebook, Worldnet, Sept. 8, 2000.

23. Ibid.

24. Mary Jo Anderson, “Leaders Lean Toward Consensus on U.N.,” Sept. 2000, World Net Daily.

25. CW News, 3/29/01.

26. Our Sunday Visitor, 9/17/2000.

27. Inside the Vatican, Oct. 2001.

28. National Catholic Register, May 14-20, 2000.

29. Ibid., Nov. 26-Dec. 2, 2000.

30. newsmax.com, 12/15/2000.

31. YankeeSamizdat.org. October 2001.

32. database.townhall.com/insight/printit.cfm.

33. Alan Keyes, “Permanent Principles of Liberty,” Townhall Commentary, World Net Daily – Article 25106.

34. Terry L. Neal, The Offshore Advantage (MasterMedia Publishing Corp.), 1998, p. 125.

35. www.newsmax.com/cgi-bin/printer-friendly. Ashcroft Eager to Expand Police Powers.

36. John Berlau, “Banks and Suspicion,”  database.townhall.com/insight/printit.cfn.

Franklin S. Fowler Jr., M.D.; EndTime Issues... of Prophecy Research Initiative
Endtime Issues..., January 2002 - EndtimeIssues.com