July 3, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
47:10
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the final screen of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies. | ||
| Because we're going medieval on these people. | ||
| Here's not got a free shot at all these networks lying about the people. | ||
| The people have had a belly full of it. | ||
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you've tried to do everything in the world to stop it, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big lie? | ||
| MAGA Media. | ||
| I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
| Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | ||
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| Good evening. | ||
| Wednesday, 2nd of July, Annodomini 2025. | ||
| Welcome to that little corner of the show when we do a little bit of a deep dive on those issues to do with the Christian faith, both Protestant and Catholic, that have a daily impact on our lives. | ||
| And coming up on the show today, we've got some great events that we're going to be breaking down. | ||
| For example, the Supreme Court ruling from a few days ago in Texas that basically said that it was legitimate of the Texas State Assembly to have a law saying that people needed to supply their ages when viewing porn websites. | ||
| We'll be talking about that a little later on in the show. | ||
| Also, to do in the Church of England with its search for a new Archbishop of Canterbury and the general decline of the Anglican Church. | ||
| And we'll also be talking about something that the war room has been on right from the beginning of Pope Leo's pontificate, which is the fact that he was basically there to bring the cash. | ||
| And we've got some developments on that that reinforce the war room's analysis. | ||
| But we're going to be starting the show today looking here at, again, back to the Supreme Court. | ||
| And this is a judgment that says that it's legitimate for perpetrators. | ||
| parents to withdraw their children from LGBT propaganda in schools. | ||
| My regular guests that have been on the show since we've been starting this from about a month or so ago will be Brandon Showwater, Liz Yore, Jenny Holland and Frank Walker. | ||
| But we're going to start today with Brandon Showwater from the Christian Post. | ||
| Brandon, good morning. | ||
| Can you tell us a bit then about this story from the Supreme Court? | ||
| It's a 6-3 victory, right? | ||
| How should this be viewed generally across the United States by parents who are sort of determined and interested in having a major role in the formation of their kids? | ||
| You're speaking about the Texas case, correct? | ||
| I'm talking about, yes, I'm talking about no, the Montgomery County. | ||
| Excuse me here. | ||
| Yeah, the Montgomery County article. | ||
| Right, yes. | ||
| Just want to be clear. | ||
| We've got a couple of good cases that have come out from the Supreme Court that are along these same lines, both in Texas, as you mentioned in your introduction there, and in the Montgomery County, Maryland case. | ||
| Yes, it was indeed a very important ruling we got last week, tail end of last week. | ||
| What happened was, and I'm actually really on the border of Montgomery County, Maryland here in DC, where a group of parents of all religions, not just Christians, but Christians were part of this, Catholics and Protestants as well as Muslims and Jews. | ||
| They came together to say that they objected to indoctrination into LGBTQ themes when their children were as young as three, and the school board did not allow the parents to opt out of that. | ||
| And in a six to three ruling, in an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, they did indeed rule in the parents' favor, saying that this was a burden on their free exercise rights of religion, that this was something that they could indeed do. | ||
| The dissent said that basically the reverse was true, that this did not impose a burden and that the burden would not be just on educators, that these themes were basically subtle, that the transgender books and these drag queens and leather, all of this kind of really disgusting things that children have no business seeing was they, those were subtle messages that didn't really affect the beliefs of the parents and their children. | ||
| And so that's how they did away with that. | ||
| But no, it's an important victory, especially for freedom of religion and for parental rights. | ||
| But I think broadly, it's kind of a shot across the bow to the social engineers in our public school system that are trying to confuse children about the basics of their bodies at a very young age, particularly when at that stage of development, they are just learning how to test reality, their cognition, their cognitive development. | ||
| Frankly, and we saw during oral arguments during that case a few months ago, we thought that maybe Justice Kagan, one of the liberal justices on the court, might join the conservatives in that opinion. | ||
| And she was saying, yeah, I think even non-religious parents wouldn't want their kids to see this kind of thing in school. | ||
| But that was just posturing. | ||
| And so I think this should be even broader than just the rights of religious parents because many secular parents don't want this either. | ||
| But it's a big win, no doubt. | ||
| Brandon, let me just ask you about that because I'm seeing these judgments come out from the court as it's currently opposed. | ||
| I'd like to see a breakdown of this because it seems to me that you have Katanji Brown, Jackson, Eleanor Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayo as a three. | ||
| And they never basically move from their always, always together, whatever the judgment is. | ||
| Sometimes you have some of the Republican nominees, if I can use that expression, going over and joining with them, but those three as a court always stay together. | ||
| Is it fair to suggest, because of that, that in fact, if there is an ideological component to the Supreme Court, it's there in those three rather than in the other six who Can cut and mix a little bit according to their own views, opinions, and backgrounds and philosophies. | ||
| That's often true, but even sometimes Kagan has joined the conservatives. | ||
| And I will say, even on these issues, a few years ago, I believe it was in 2018, there was the famous case about the Colorado Christian Baker who did not wish to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. | ||
| He also didn't want to bake a cake for a white supremacist or other Halloween cakes. | ||
| And so Kagan actually did side with Justice Breyer, who that's who Katanji Brown Jackson replaced. | ||
| So that was a seven to two ruling where two of the liberal appointees did join the conservatives. | ||
| Broadly speaking, you usually see the liberal justice hanging together more often, though, than the conservative justices. | ||
| That's broadly true. | ||
| Okay, I'm going to bring in Frank Walker now and Jenny Holland just to ask to make a couple of points based on this story. | ||
| But before they join in, let me just ask you, is it fair to synthesize then this 6-3 judgment as the Supreme Court effectively asserting, putting the parents back in the number one position, and rather than having this view that the left like to promote, which is to put the state in, the Department of Education, but the state specifically in as the parent, not the parent of last resort, but increasingly the parents of first resort. | ||
| Would that be a fair way of summarizing this 6-3 decision? | ||
| I think so. | ||
| And I would expect to see future cases further strengthening parental rights. | ||
| This was, I think, a very important test case to see what the Supreme Court would do. | ||
| And it's good because, again, I think parental rights, it's great that the rights of religious parents are protected. | ||
| But I think more broadly, all parental rights, whether you're religious or not, should be safeguarded. | ||
| So is it a blow against statism, the state controlling your children? | ||
| I think so. | ||
| And I would anticipate that this current court will further enshrine parental rights. | ||
| I would anticipate that for future cases in the coming years. | ||
| Brandon Sherwater from the Christian Post. | ||
| Thanks very much. | ||
| Hold on. | ||
| Frank Walker, let's come to you now. | ||
| Give me your thoughts and analysis, if you wouldn't mind, on this 6-3 judgment. | ||
| Well, I agree. | ||
| I hope that they can do more. | ||
| This is what they did. | ||
| They used to do this years ago just with Sex Ed. | ||
| They were given the option to opt out of it, but it's kind of an onerous process. | ||
| They don't always cooperate in the schools, and a lot of parents don't want to make their child feel humiliated or singled out. | ||
| Those are powerful things that keep people from taking advantage of this. | ||
| Today, there's just a survey this week, 60% of parents don't want any prayer in the school. | ||
| They don't want teachers leading prayer. | ||
| So these kinds of strong-arm tactics, which is what this whole process is, they have an effect over time. | ||
| But I think with the Catholics, this is meaningful because in the Catholic Church, there's a lot of push among the bishops to have fully funded Catholic programs. | ||
| There's just a the courts just shut down a trade school that was fully funded in West Virginia. | ||
| And up in North Dakota, I think it was, there was another one that was a fully funded Catholic charter school. | ||
| Both of those have been shut down. | ||
| But as soon as that happens, where we get all that money in the Catholic Church schools, these kinds of things are going to happen a lot more. | ||
| Because in countries like Canada and Ireland, where they have fully funded Catholic schools, these become issues for them too. | ||
| Sure, I think I noticed a reference in the judgment to this being free education. | ||
| And of course, just to be, without wanting to be too pedantic about this, it's not free education. | ||
| It's paid for by parents via their taxation. | ||
| And that, I think, is another fun. | ||
| If there's one aspect here that the Supreme Court has confirmed, which is the relationship between the parent and the child. | ||
| Tacitly, I think there's also the issue here of the fact that the parents have a right, not only as parents, but also as the fact that they're paying for their children's welfare and education. | ||
| Jenny Holland, I know you've got a quick point that you want to make on this story. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I picked up on the same thing that Brandon mentioned, which was the dissenting liberal justices reference to subtle themes and that the parents did not, were being granted an invented constitutional right to protect them from said subtle themes. | ||
| And that really struck me because you have to be willfully blind to think that the kind of material that the parents were raising objections to is in any way subtle. | ||
| And if it's anything like the many books I have seen designed for school-aged children, they are anything but subtle. | ||
| They are borderline pornographic or overtly pornographic, just with sort of like a weird, cutesy twist. | ||
| And they're completely unacceptable. | ||
| And I am a secular parent, and I absolutely would die on the hill of not letting my school-aged child be subjected to this under the guise of learning. | ||
| We don't need to learn such things as children. | ||
| There is absolutely no reason for it. | ||
| Liberals seem trapped in this paradigm where they still think it's the 1950s or maybe the 1980s and there's a bunch of sort of knuckle-dragging fundamentalists running around trying to protect their children from the existence, like knowing of the existence of gay people. | ||
| But what we're talking about is graphic, and I mean like pictures of sex acts, sometimes between children themselves. | ||
| This is not subtle. | ||
| This is about as subtle as a sledgehammer. | ||
| The aspect on pornography here is, I think, a tie into the thing that we're going to go and discuss now, which is the other Supreme Court judgment over the last few days. | ||
| Jenny, hold on. | ||
| We'll be coming back to you later on in the show. | ||
| First of all, I just want to Do a quick mention for Birch Gold. | ||
| This July, there's a global summit of BRICS Nations in Rio de Janeiro. | ||
| The bloc of emerging superpowers, including China, Russia, India, and Iran, are meeting with the goal of displacing the US dollar as the global currency. | ||
| They're calling this the Rio Reset. | ||
| Learn if diversifying your savings into gold is right for you. | ||
| Birch Gold Group can help you move your hard-earned savings into a tax-sheltered IRA in precious metals. | ||
| Claim your free info kit on gold by texting Bannon, that's B-A-N-N-O-N to 989898. | ||
| That's 989898. | ||
| Okay, let's move on now. | ||
| Liz, you're you've got the analysis of this other SCOTUS. | ||
| I think it's also 6-3 judgment from a couple of days ago, which says that Texas, the state of Texas, can require porn websites to verify users' ages. | ||
| Tell us a bit about this, will you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| And this is another victory for parents and children. | ||
| The Supreme Court decision involves a 2023 Texas law, which required adult websites to verify ages of the users to ensure that they were over the age of 18. | ||
| And the name of the case is Free Speech Coalition versus Ken Paxson. | ||
| Texas law required, for example, Pornhub, which is one of the largest adult pornography site, I might add, of Hunter Biden fame, and other adult websites to verify user age. | ||
| And it found that the Supreme Court found that that requirement is constitutional. | ||
| The verification of the user is ensured, especially with websites that have more than one-third of their content is considered harmful to minors. | ||
| Now, a group of adult websites filed a lawsuit saying that this is a violation of free speech and privacy. | ||
| And interestingly, the Supreme Court decision was again a 6-3 majority of the court sided with the Texas law finding that the age requirement verification is within the state's authority to prevent children from accessing sexually explicit content. | ||
| Judge Thomas wrote the majority decision. | ||
| The same three justices demured. | ||
| And this is, you know, more than a dozen states have filed or have passed similar laws. | ||
| In fact, the EU with their 27 countries have passed the similar age verification law. | ||
| Ken Paxon, the IG of Texas, said it was a major victory for children and parents and the ability to protect minors from the damaging effects of pornography. | ||
| Now, people, I'm sure, know, but if they don't, they need to be told that pornography on the internet is not your grandfather's Playboy magazine. | ||
| It is, nowadays, it is violent. | ||
| It is exploited to the worst possible extremes. | ||
| It is absolutely perverse. | ||
| And to have an age verification is absolutely essential for children. | ||
| You know, a child can't go to a brick and mortar store and buy pornography. | ||
| So why should they be able to easily access it on a, you know, internet website in the digital space? | ||
| But mainstream online pornography is a very, very powerful billion-dollar industry. | ||
| And research has shown that one in a 12% of the video titles in these mainstream pornography sites, such as Pornhub, and I'm not going to mention the others, describe activities which constitute sexual violence. | ||
| And children end up on these sites, sometimes tripping onto these sites, being socialized in sexual violence. | ||
| But interestingly, Pornhub, as a result of this law, has suspended services in Texas, which I think is, frankly, a good step. | ||
| And interestingly, since 2020, 300 victims have sued Pornhub in 25 lawsuits saying that there are videos of rape and trafficking on these websites. | ||
| That's what people need to realize, how dangerous these sites are, especially for children. | ||
| Liz, I know few people in America have done more to protect the integrity of kids and their childhood than you. | ||
| And I'm glad that we had you on the show today to break this result down. | ||
| But let me ask you something, Liz, because this is one of those occasions when I was reading the dissent and I actually found myself not convinced, but aware that I think there was an argument here that isn't going to go away. | ||
| And I wouldn't be surprised if the Supreme Court doesn't revisit this at a future stage from the privacy perspective. | ||
| This is what Justice Kagan had to say, that the modality of having to prove your age to supply your age turns over, and I quote, turns over information about yourself and your viewing habits, respecting speech many find repulsive, to a website operator. | ||
| And then to, who knows, the operator might, and this is the point, right? | ||
| The operator might sell the information, might be hacked, or that information might even be subpoena. | ||
| So obviously, I mean, I don't have any real, in principle, issue with the requirement at least to verify your age to view these websites. | ||
| But there is this other issue here, which I say I don't think it's going to go Away to do with the privacy and where that data goes. | ||
| Do you have any, as someone who is a lifelong child advocate for children, do you have any response to these privacy issues? | ||
| Well, you know, many of these websites require your credit card to access this information. | ||
| So they don't seem to have problems with the privacy when they submit their credit card. | ||
| And, you know, this is always a balancing act. | ||
| And what I love to, what I'm really happy to see is that the pendulum is going back to protecting children as we now are knee-deep into the internet world. | ||
| And so it's always going to be a balancing act between freedom of speech and privacy. | ||
| But what we're now seeing, and I would encourage people, go to my website because I've listed a lot of research that's been done about the impact of pornography on children and on society. | ||
| And we need to be ever vigilant to protect our most vulnerable. | ||
| You know, male brains don't stop developing until they're 25. | ||
| So you're taking a developing brain and submitting it to these violent images. | ||
| You know, they've looked at CAT scans when people are looking at pornography. | ||
| And the part of the brain that lights up is the same part of the brain that lights up when people are on cocaine and on drugs. | ||
| This is a powerful, powerful tool. | ||
| And we imposed it immediately in the internet without any serious consideration of the consequences on not only adults, but on children. | ||
| And so this is, I think, long overdue. | ||
| Liz, stand by. | ||
| Let's just cut back now to Jenny because I know you've got a reaction to this. | ||
| Jenny Holland. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| Oh, hi. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Well, I'm relieved, obviously, again, that the ruling went the way it did. | ||
| To me, what was so interesting, again, was in the dissent, the liberal justices wrote that this was impeding the, they acknowledged the importance of, or that the state had an interest in safeguarding children, but I think they worded it as impeded the rights of adults to access this speech. | ||
| I'm just so relieved that the rights of children are being put ahead of the rights of adults, especially men, to be titillated 24-7, because that's essentially what this comes down to. | ||
| We're not talking about political ideas. | ||
| We're not talking about ideas of any kind. | ||
| And that, in fact, brings me to my second point, which is I don't quite understand how this is framed as a free speech issue because porn to me personally is not speech. | ||
| There is no speaking, literally. | ||
| It's all action. | ||
| And the idea that you should have a protected right to watch multiple men violating a woman or incest, act of incest occurring, how on earth is that protected speech? | ||
| I've never understood that. | ||
| Jenny, I'm going to ask you this question and I'm going to also ask Brandon Showwater the same question. | ||
| Do you see that there are competing interests here, not on the free speech issue so much, but on the issue between the privacy here of data, of user data, and where that might finish? | ||
| Is that a consideration here in your general support for the requirement of age verification? | ||
| Not really, not to me personally. | ||
| I mean, I'm sure, at least legally, I understand that you can make a case for it, but I find it highly ironic that they are pretending to be worried about privacy when you are engaging in an activity which is voyeuristically watching people do the most, you know, apparently private or what are supposed to be the most private things of all. | ||
| I mean, I think it's such a morally vacuous argument. | ||
| You are in the filthy, dirty, dark corners of the internet. | ||
| So yeah, if you're worried about your privacy, maybe that should be a tell that you shouldn't be there at all. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All right. | |
| Okay. | ||
| Brandon Sherwalter, give me, if you wouldn't mind your quick take on this SCOTUS decision. | ||
| Tell me, do you have any privacy concerns about this? | ||
| Or am I the only one? | ||
| No, I hate porn with a passionate fury. | ||
| So I was glad to see the Supreme Court take such a strong stand in the interest of safeguarding children because the pornography industry, as Jenny was just saying, does indeed try to frame their cause as a free speech issue. | ||
| And Americans who are very live and let live type of people are often persuaded by that. | ||
| Pornography is the business of sexual exploitation. | ||
| That is not free speech. | ||
| And so it's a crucial win. | ||
| And I mean, it really does say something, I think, about the left-wing mind that you're actually going to prioritize the rights of adults to view smut over the protection of children. | ||
| I mean, pandering obscenity to minors is a crime. | ||
| And so why on earth is it even controversial for a state to put a law in place to say, let's make it hard for a child to see this? | ||
| Because if, you know, a prowler in the bushes who tries to show a dirty magazine to children would be arrested on the spot. | ||
| Is it any different if an online pornographer is trying to get at children with a screen? | ||
| I don't think there's much of a difference there. | ||
| And so as you know, the laws need to update as technology progresses. | ||
| And so this seems like an eminently reasonable thing. | ||
| And the fact that it took a conservative-leaning Supreme Court to affirm this, given, you know, previous precedent, which was in favor of the porn industry, this is a very welcome development. | ||
| And let's hope that this is the first of many. | ||
| I think for the Supreme Court to rule against the pornography industry, then they call themselves the Free Speech Coalition. | ||
| That's a very strategic misnomer there. | ||
| That's what they call themselves. | ||
| It just shows the extent of their efforts to hoodwink the public and to gaslight them into thinking that sexual exploitation of the worst kind is actually a First Amendment protected right. | ||
| Look, as a one-time political consultant, I know we've got a break coming up in just 30 seconds. | ||
| I'll close with this observation. | ||
| As a former political consultant, if you are of the opinion, and everyone, all the commentators on the show today seem to be of this opinion that this is an excellent judgment, if you want to ensure that this judgment remains in place and isn't overturned at some point in the future, it is absolutely imperative on you, warring possibly America more widely, that you do everything that you can so that there will not be any data leak. | ||
| Because that's the thing that will put the judgment like this in jeopardy, which is the swing of popular public opinion turning against. | ||
| Okay, back in three minutes after this short break. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Van. | ||
| Welcome back. | ||
| Often as we hit these developments and try and break them down, we'll go to a key reference in a newspaper or magazine to help analyse this. | ||
| But occasionally, it's the article itself in the magazine that I think is the story. | ||
| And that's the case with this analysis on the situation in the Church of England that Jenny Holland's going to break down for us today in The Economist of all, I think it calls itself a newspaper, of all newspapers, The Economist, talking about the situation here that there was both recently, for the first time, I think, since, I don't know, it cites it 1691, both the See of Rome and the See of Canterbury were vacant. | ||
| Jenny, tell me a bit about this article and what impressed you about its analysis to do with the general condition of the Church of England in England today? | ||
| Well, I'm afraid it's more bad news from your home country, Ben. | ||
| As regards the Church of England, it is in something of a precipitous decline, which won't necessarily be a surprise to anyone who watches the war room regularly. | ||
| And I know that the Anglicans in the States have a similar spiritual crisis. | ||
| But this very, very illustrative article detailed the staggering loss of numbers of congregants that the Church of England is undergoing. | ||
| The most striking statistic was that in 2011, 60% of Britons identified themselves as Christians. | ||
| And in 2021, less than half of Britons identified as such. | ||
| And a little over 1% of Church of England members go to church every week. | ||
| So as a result of this, they're selling off churches. | ||
| Something like 20 churches close every year. | ||
| And it's a really dire situation in terms of the national faith of the United Kingdom. | ||
| This is also going to get worse, likely with the ascension of Prince William when he takes his father's place, whenever that may be. | ||
| He's described in this article, very interestingly, as not instinctively comfortable, and my favorite phrase of all, with a quote-unquote faith environment. | ||
| And again, here we go back to this weird, bureaucratic, detached language that seems to be very much in vogue in Church of England. | ||
| They don't seem to be able to say things directly. | ||
| Everything sounds like an HR memo. | ||
| So it's very worrying, especially given the very politically conflicted time that we're going through right now here, where we have a Labor government that's very unpopular, a very restive native population, growing anger, if not fury and rage, over double standards in policing and in criminal prosecutions. | ||
| And, you know, is it any wonder then if they're going to be so wishy-washy and timid and so detached from any kind of spiritual enthusiasm, is it any wonder that they're losing people hand over fist? | ||
| Yeah, and the interesting thing about this article in The Economist, of all places, is that this really will affect the culture of the UK, of England, and its sense of itself, right? | ||
| You have an observation, don't you, Jenny, that this is, and I always say you are a unique contributor on these things discussing religious and Christian affairs as someone who is atheist, though open brackets, you do pray the rosary every day. | ||
| And this is your insight that from that perspective as well, that for not just the Church of England, but all ecclesial communions, this is what will happen if you replace the priority of God in the life of your church community with other distractions and considerations, right? | ||
| Yes, absolutely. | ||
| The people who are turning toward Christianity at the moment, and I am definitely one of them, but there's a lot more like me, people who are from liberal, progressive, even left-wing backgrounds and secular backgrounds. | ||
| We don't want to go to church or join a religious community, again, to be told, you know, oh, tut-tut, and oh, be careful now. | ||
| And blah, blah, blah. | ||
| No, we can find that at work. | ||
| We can be lectured to by the HR ladies when we go into the office. | ||
| We don't need that when we're seeking spiritual refuge and spiritual strength. | ||
| And it's, you know, it is, it's very interesting that The Economist is even saying that the demise of the Church of England is not a matter just for the faithful. | ||
| I mean, and if The Economist is saying that, and I've heard it called The Economarxist, it is not at all a MAGA publication. | ||
| I mean, we're talking about the broadsheet for, or the magazine for the globalists. | ||
| And even they're acknowledging that this is going to have a profound effect on the very nation. | ||
| I mean, this is the religion of the nation. | ||
| I think there were 26, 24, 26 bishops that automatically have a seat in the legislature, in the House of Lords, automatically by right. | ||
| It's an established church. | ||
| It's exactly what America doesn't have on this. | ||
| It's an established church. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And you have to have 5,000 schools as well. | |
| Okay, so, you know, that could be such a positive force, but knowing the sort of rot that they push out in their homilies, I can only hang my head and wonder how that's further adding to the deterioration of the culture of the UK. | ||
| Let's go to Liz Yor now. | ||
| Liz, give me your, if you wouldn't mind, just give me a minute or two on your response to the economist's analysis here. | ||
| Well, I think the Catholic Church should take note of the Church of England because what is happening there is the same thing that is rolling out in the Catholic Church. | ||
| I mean, climate change from the pulpit, LGBT agenda from the pulpit, cover-up of clergy abuse. | ||
| Justin Welby had to step down, the head of the Church of England, because he had covered up a clergy abuse case. | ||
| But, you know, it really reminds me of GK Chesterton, who I love, who said, you know, do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out. | ||
| Well, it sure seems like both in the Catholic Church and the Church of England, we're being so open-minded, so politically correct, that the brains of the church are falling right out on the altar. | ||
| And additionally, he also said, tolerance is the virtue of people who do not believe in anything. | ||
| And we see this politicization of the churches and people walking away from the politicization of the churches because they want truth, they want transcendence, and they want the gospel and moral life. | ||
| And so it's a really parallel situation that the Catholic Church would be well advised to pay attention. | ||
| Wise words. | ||
| Let's quickly go to Frank Walker. | ||
| Frank, you've got a tough job now. | ||
| You've got the ante on GK Chesterton. | ||
| Are you able to rise to that particular challenge? | ||
| No. | ||
| But I can tell you that it's so striking that government money always seems to destroy churches. | ||
| A big endowment and only 1% in the actual going to church. | ||
| Nobody knows. | ||
| And it's just not with them. | ||
| It's with the Catholics. | ||
| It's all kind of just bubbled up. | ||
| It's propped up by government money. | ||
| I think that just like the Anglicans and the Catholics in the establishment have a lot in common, the solution is for Catholics, traditional Catholics, to target all sorts of other people like Anglicans, because together, England has a Catholic heritage. | ||
| It goes back a lot further than the Anglican Church. | ||
| They need to recover their actual traditional Catholic heritage. | ||
| I think that can grow. | ||
| The problem is, isn't it, Frank? | ||
| The problem is once you set out on the road of trying to, of hitching your future to modernism and modernity, everyone who believes will leave. | ||
| And all you're going to be left with are the people who are going to be scared by religiosity. | ||
| So what I mean to say is once you start down that track, isn't it very difficult to pull back? | ||
| Yes, and all of these churches that they're selling off cheap, I'm wondering who's buying that. | ||
| I know that Chesterton and Hilaire Block said Islam is going to take over with this weak Christianity in Europe, and that was 100 years ago. | ||
| The renewal needs to happen faster than the Islamization, especially in the UK. | ||
| Okay, Frank, stay there, because we're going to come to you now to have all of the worst prejudices that the war room has held over the last five or six weeks to do with the Leo pontificate confirmed. | ||
| But first, let's just quickly go back to Birch Gold. | ||
| As the BRICS nations push forward with their plans, global demand for US dollars will decrease, bringing down the value of the dollars in your savings. | ||
| Whilst this transition won't happen overnight, the Rio reset in July marks a pivotal moment when BRICS objectives move decisively from theoretical possibility toward inevitable reality. | ||
| With an A-plus rating with a Better Business Bureau and tens of thousands of happy customers, let Birch Gold arm you with a free no-obligation info kit on owning gold before July and the Rio reset. | ||
| Text Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N to 989898 today. | ||
| That's Bannon to 989898 today. | ||
| Okay, Frank, let's come to you now with this analysis from Politico, which says that Pope Leo looks to mega donors to shore up church finances. | ||
| Tell me, before you break this down, isn't this exactly what the war room had been warning about? | ||
| What Politico has said here? | ||
| Isn't this exactly what we have said on this show from day one? | ||
| Well, that there's money problems in the church. | ||
| Yeah, you have said that. | ||
| And they're really hoping that Leo can recover this money. | ||
| In fact, even going back to the time of when he was elected a couple months ago, they had an America week and they referenced in this article where they had pledges of a billion dollars if they get the right Pope. | ||
| But this article here has a lot of telling quotes, but I think, you know, as with a lot of political stuff, there's a lot of spin that's happening here. | ||
| But they're saying that Leo is touching all the right points. | ||
| It's going to make conservative align with conservative donors, but I don't necessarily agree that he's aligned with conservative donors. | ||
| The press is making it seem like he's aligning with conservative donors. | ||
| And they say that Francis has cleaned up the Vatican Bank and that Leo is helping it. | ||
| But Leo is just, I think, reinforcing the same corruption that's been there before. | ||
| It's all about raising money. | ||
| And this weekend, there was a big thing about how he's asking, actually asking them to give money so they can have unity with him. | ||
| But he's not doing anything to change the real problem, which is that, because there's a lot of donors out there that support the church that are not conservative. | ||
| In fact, I don't even know if there's, who are the big conservative donors out there? | ||
| And they say, well, they got Leo because they had conservative prelates who are backing him up and saying, but who are these conservative, you know, where is the power? | ||
| They said in this article that Cardinal Burke even had a meeting with Leo, two meetings with Leo, but it's all anonymous. | ||
| He's not even commenting on that story. | ||
| So I think that there's a lot of spin in this article. | ||
| I'm not quite sure. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I've actually heard pushback against some of those things because some of those things were being pushed out by the Trad Inc. | ||
| Brigade precisely because they wanted to hit the fundraisers. | ||
| And from certain quarters, I've had that confirmed. | ||
| Some of these things simply didn't occur. | ||
| Let me just, before we go to Brandon, because I want to hear what his take as a Protestant is to what's going on, because we Catholics comment on the Protestant communion. | ||
| I want to get how this appears to him. | ||
| But before I do that, let me just read this line here from this article. | ||
| And this is why I say I think it confirms the war room's coverage really from the first day of this pontificate. | ||
| Insiders say that Leo was elected in part because as an American he exuded an Anglo-Saxon financial seriousness. | ||
| He was also seen as well positioned to bring back donations that have dried up thanks to persistent scandal and the hemorrhaging of support from powerful American Catholic conservatives, you know, like the Papal Foundation. | ||
| This is exactly what we said, literally word for word, since the beginning. | ||
| Brandon, tell me what is the view from within Protestantom, if I might coin that term on this. | ||
| Are you scandalized or do you see very much the same thing going on in evangelical churches? | ||
| I live with three Catholics. | ||
| I have a graduate degree from the Catholic University of America. | ||
| And so I do love the Catholics, even though I am a Protestant. | ||
| I am kind of scandalized by it. | ||
| I just really think that if you really want to see people come to faith in Jesus, what must be done, this just sounds so simple, but it's so true, is that the gospel must be proclaimed faithfully in all of its truth. | ||
| If you're going to take money from people that will water it down or compromise it, you can expect to see what's happened in the Church of England. | ||
| These churches are lifeless because they do not proclaim repentance from sin. | ||
| If they bow to the spirit of the age, you're going to have a lifeless, soul-sucking, dead-as-a-doornail church. | ||
| And I think that applies across the board. | ||
| With respect to the Catholics and the funding and what Pope Leo is trying to do and the politics around that, I will admit that it's very strange for me to even be invited to comment on it, except to say that I think that I happen to think that God is doing a big work of cleansing across the board. | ||
| And wherever there's funding money or compromise, I think that we're in a time now where I believe we will see the Lord cleanse the rot from his entire church, Catholic and Protestant alike. | ||
| That's my take on it. | ||
| Brandon, thanks so much. | ||
| Liz, closing words on this to you. | ||
| Yeah, I thought this was such a brazen money pitch. | ||
| I mean, I felt like we were back in the days of the Medici popes where, you know, which one can fill the coffers? | ||
| That one will ascend the chair of St. Peter. | ||
| It's really unseemly and unholy. | ||
| Are we really at the point of where the College of Cardinals are admittedly going to pander to the rich Americans by conjoling them that we gave you your first American pope? | ||
| So pony up. | ||
| It's, as Brandon said, we want a good, holy man who will preach the faith and protect tradition and dogma and lead the church and purify the church after really 100 years of the corruption of modernists. | ||
| So it was just shocking for me to see this and to think that we are so superficial to read this article and think, oh, yes, I'll open my wallet because, you know, he's an American wearing a Chicago white sock hat. | ||
| It's time to really grow up and get serious. | ||
| But perhaps they really do believe it and perhaps the money is really drying up. | ||
| Yeah, I think it dovetails nicely. | ||
| Shame we can't break it down today on Pope Leo's exegesis on the multiplication of the loaves. | ||
| Liz, where do people go to keep up with your unique and essential analysis on social media? | ||
| I'm everywhere under Elizabeth York on all social media platforms. | ||
| Also, on my website, yourchildren.com, I've also put a lot of information for parents about the dangers of pornography, a lot of the data and statistics. | ||
| So feel free to visit there and educate yourself on this issue. | ||
| Elizabeth, thanks very much for coming on the show. | ||
| Catch up with you next Wednesday evening, God willing. | ||
| Brandon Show auto Christian Post, where do people go to keep up with your writing and with your analysis? | ||
| Brandon, you can go to follow me on X at BrandonM Show. | ||
| All of our print reporting is at ChristianPost.com. | ||
| And stay tuned for season five of our podcast series, our documentary podcast called Generation Indoctrination Inside the Transgender Battle. | ||
| And that will be on generationindoctrination.com. | ||
| That's our landing page. | ||
| And it's also on all major podcast platforms wherever you get your podcasts. | ||
| Are you on Getter? | ||
| I'm not on Getter. | ||
| We're going to have to do something about that. | ||
| Brandon, thanks for coming on the show. | ||
| Hope to catch up again with you soon. | ||
| And I can't compliment the Christian Post highly enough. | ||
| Catch up again with you soon. | ||
| God bless for now. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Jenny Holland, where do people go to catch up with you on social media? | ||
| I know you have your substack. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| My substack goes out every week, and it's jennyholland.substack.com. | ||
| And you can also find me on Twitter at Semper Femina21. | ||
| But I send an essay out every week, Saving Culture from Itself. | ||
| And you are on Getter now, aren't you? | ||
| I am on Getter. | ||
| I think it's Jenny E. Holland, but I haven't checked in a while. | ||
| Okay, Jenny, thanks for coming on the show. | ||
| Catch up with you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Next Wednesday, God willing. | ||
| And Frank Walker, the Catholic Church's answer to Matt Drudge. | ||
| I'll ask you kindly, as I always do, if you wouldn't mind posting the links for tonight's show on your website, Canon212, where people can go to download them. | ||
| Canon 212212 is the, I go to it every day, several times a day, to find out what the breaking news is in the Catholic Church. | ||
| Can't compliment your website high enough. | ||
| Frank, just give the readings, if you wouldn't mind, of your social media, please. |
Export Selection