What is happening in Democrat-controlled cities is not accidental. It’s called treason. The desired result is revolution.

Historian Will Durant wrote in the Age of Napoleon that the Jacobins and all Frenchmen who had rejected divine revelation and were now dependent on reason “all concurred in hoping that devotion to the young republic would become the religion of the people; that Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity would replace God, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and that the furtherance of the new Trinity could be made the overriding aim of social order and the final test of morality.”

But it was not to be.

Abbe Augustin Barruel was an honest, scholarly, informed apologist and defender of Christian morality and Roman Catholic Church’s rights. He was a Jesuit priest and famous writer during the French Revolution who charged that the Revolution was planned and executed by secret societies and had been planned for decades, beginning with Voltaire. Voltaire, Rousseau, and other philosophers conspired with secret societies to destroy Catholicism and France’s monarchy.

The philosophers’ writings had a significant influence on those who would lead the Revolution, and Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and their followers were responsible for the training of budding revolutionaries. However, they would have been horrified had they lived to see the results of their diatribes against the church, the crown, and the cottage.

It is charged that Barruel developed the above as a conspiracy theory because of his hatred of the Illuminati. Still, even if he hated or feared the Illuminati, that does not mean his information is faulty. The Illuminati refers to the Bavarian Illuminati, a secret society founded on May 1, 1776, in Bavaria, now a part of Germany. The secret group opposed all religious influence over public life and what they considered abuses of state power. Moreover, they believed any kind of government was unnecessary because of the perfectibility of man. There was no need for the church, crown, or cottage.

Highly principled and respected leaders in Europe and England, living at the time, had high praise for Barruel’s work in exposing the conspiracy. The much-respected Englishman Edmund Burke wrote to Barruel in praise of his book, declaring, “I have known myself, personally, five of your principal conspirators; and I can undertake to say from my own certain knowledge, that as far back as the year 1773, they were busy in the plot you have so well described, and in the manner, and on the principle you have so truly represented. To this I can speak as a witness.”

A contemporary of Burke in England, the Scottish scientist John Robison, published Proofs of a Conspiracy against All the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of the Free Masons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies. Robison reported the same as Burke as to secret societies and their involvement in the Revolution.

Winston Churchill wrote of the Illuminati in a February 8, 1920 article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald and referred to it as “this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization.”

This alone does not prove that the Illuminati were a significant cause of the French Revolution, but it does demonstrate the group existed at the time and exercised enormous influence. It was not a group of nutty men who had more toes than teeth, but the opposite—the Illuminati were the leaders in the universities and some European governments. The Illuminati were such a threat that various governments outlawed them.

In his Lectures on the French Revolution, Lord Acton observed, “The appalling thing in the French Revolution is not the tumult, but the design. Through all the fire and smoke, we perceive the evidence of calculating organisation. The managers remain studiously concealed and masked; but there is no doubt about their presence from the first.”

The first two volumes by Abbe Barruel published in 1797 and the other two in 1798, following the French Revolution in 1789, took great pains to document that Jacobins, Freemasons, the Illuminati, and others carefully planned on removing from France all government authority, all churches, and the father-led family. The conspirators used the peasants’ resentment toward the special privileges of the Church and nobles and gave the people the reason for self-justification for the extremism that followed.

The philosophers, trying to change public opinion, decided to publish a multi-volume Encyclopédie consisting of general knowledge. It was co-founded and edited by Denise Diderot, who thought he was moral because he had only one mistress at a time. They began publishing in 1751 and had profound political, social, and intellectual repercussions in France just before the Revolution. Its contributors were called Encyclopédistes.

The Encyclopédie’s purpose was “to change the way people think” based upon human reason, not divine revelation. Chief Editor Diderot expressed the radical philosophy of many revolutionaries by having one of his characters in a drama say, “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” That was the tone of many of the articles that were published and prepared France for revolution.

It would have been a surprise if a revolution had not happened.
Among the skepticism and humanism in the publication, there was much useful information. Of course, a little poison can make a pot of soup deadly. The writers had a big job to corrupt the nation since the people (especially outside Paris, Versailles, and Marseilles) had marinated for centuries in family traditions, the Roman Church, and respect for the king. For decades, they and their children had been educated by the Catholic Jesuits.

Barruel defined philosophism as “the error of every man who, judging of all things by the standard of his own reason, rejects in religious matters every authority that is not derived from the light of nature.” The political termites believed mankind must rely on reason, not revelation since the elitists thought only fools trust revelation over reason. So, religion (the Roman Catholic Church) and the monarchy based on the divine right of kings must be denigrated, denied, and destroyed.

Barruel believed the volumes of the Encyclopédie were successful in controlling the minds of intellectuals and creating public opinion against the church and crown. The various writers were men dedicated to expanding science and secular thought, laying a foundation for the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was reasonable, reforming, and eventually revolutionary.

Barruel and others declared the publication was an intellectual introduction to the French Revolution. He and others believed the volumes of the Encyclopédie were successful in controlling the minds of young intellectuals and creating public opinion against the church and crown and cottage.

The skepticism and lack of support for the Church and the Bible in the Encyclopédie brought much criticism and opposition from Church leaders from its first volume. The Catholic Jesuits especially fought the offensive publication, and the group was made illegal in France in 1764 as they were in Portugal, Hungary, Austria, and other nations.

The Encyclopédie’s publication was opposed by Church and government officials and was censored and repressed in 1752. In 1759, the government denied permission for publication. The Revolution started in earnest in 1789 and lasted until the late 1790s ending with Napoleon’s dictatorship.

The volatile, vicious, and often vile authors fed into the common people’s hatred and envy against the Church and anyone wearing silk knee-breeches, the nobility. Aldous Huxley correctly asserted, “The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior ‘righteous indignation’— this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats.”

The Revolution was an attack upon all authority and gave frustrated, angry, resentful, and hungry people an excuse to take their licks on those people and groups they hated.

America has been softened by pious preachers, purring politicians, pathetic professors, and a perverted press to where few people think for themselves or think critically. They long ago rejected revelation and climbed into bed with reason.

We are ripe for the Second American Revolution, and the chaos around us was planned by the radical left; and they are charging Trump and his followers of doing what the left itself has successfully accomplished. Democrats have traditionally accused Republicans of what the Democrats have been doing.

I don’t want to shout fire in a crowded theater, but folks, we are surrounded by an uncontrolled conflagration, and leftists have cut the water hose. It is time to form bucket brigades, and everyone does their part to extinguish the flames.

America is at risk.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

Each of the three Popes excommunicated the others.

The Church managed to survive that fiasco, the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Reformation, but will it survive the global sex scandal and the machinations of Pope Francis?

In recent days, it was revealed that Francis has been up to some hanky-panky when it was discovered that he “liked” a seminude model’s picture on Instagram. The Vatican announced today that it has launched a probe into the nudie caper.

It seems the Pope keeps stepping in it almost weekly. Maybe he believes any publicity is good publicity.

Many Roman Catholics think Pope Francis is a loose cannon that has broken away from its mounting and constitutes a danger to the whole Church as it shoots in all directions. Headlines in the Daily Mail blared, “Vatican at War!” Even cardinals are running away from his latest folly. His latest shot was an endorsement of civil marriages for the LGBTQ crowd, thinking that such action would help him win a global popularity contest.

And stop the bleeding of money and members or, more crudely, nickels, and noses.

The Pope’s goal is to bring us all together in an attempt to undo the sixteenth-century Reformation and have a world church supporting a world government and world economy.

Was the Reformation a mistake, or was it one of the most significant events in world history?

Most educated people don’t have a firm grasp on the world’s religious, political, economic, and social conditions in the Middle Ages. Nor do they know what has been the dream, some say nightmare, of globalists—a united worldwide church. After all, who will disagree with everyone getting along? Of course, no one will, but there is much difference in getting along with people and uniting with those with whom you have vast differences.

The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) has always considered Protestants as “separated brethren” even though the Roman Church declared for hundreds of years that there was no salvation outside the RCC. They always invite non-Catholics back into the fold with the understanding that the Vatican will still run things, and their peculiar doctrines and practices will prevail. Catholic officials are willing to overlook minor theological disputes and ignore them as a condition of bringing the breakaway denominations “back home.”

As long as they bring their checkbooks and don’t try to run things.

While Rome is willing to concede on minor differences, they will not concede on the veneration of Mary or the mass. During the 18th century in France, ordinary Frenchmen ridiculed the Roman Catholic Church (their national church) for their teaching of turning a piece of bread into God. However, Rome will not concede on the mass.

Get ready, folks, the world church is being formed with headquarters in Rome, but here is one Bible-believer who will never “return to Rome” since my crowd was never in her! Independent churches were publicly baptizing converts in huge tubs throughout Germany, Switzerland, and other European nations long before the Reformation. I will stay independent (as were all original churches) as a hog on ice and free as an eagle until shrimp learn to whistle and pigs learn to fly.

An all-inclusive, world church is not going back to the Bible but back to bondage!

According to LifeSiteNews of August 22, 2019, a multi-faith committee was announced “to implement the ‘Human Fraternity’ document signed by Pope Francis and a Grand Imam in February that stated, among other things, that a ‘pluralism and diversity, of religions, is willed by God.’”

But then, the only way we can know the will of God is what is revealed in His Word. The Bible does not endorse a world church but a definite coming out from among them. Not unity but separation. The Bible never teaches denominationalism or world church, but each local church is to be a group of simple, sincere, and scholarly Christians who meet to sing, pray, and preach without any interference from any government or denominational authority.

The Pope has no more biblical authority than an ordinary pastor or priest in an obscure village.

Francis is aware that his biggest problem in constructing the world church will be Muslims who are accustomed to running everything, including the guillotine. Also, the Jews have been around longer than anyone has, so they will not be quick to respond to this theological courtship or, more correctly, seduction. Some Jews even believe all non-Jews are of a different and inferior species! How will that play in Rome? Or Tehran?

So, headlines yell, “Vatican issues a happy Ramadan to all ‘Muslim brothers and sisters’”; however, traditional Muslims do not consider any non-Muslims as spiritually related. The Koran often identifies all non-Muslims as “polytheists,” “unbelievers,” “infidels,” etc., with which Muslims are not to be friendly. And for sure not to cooperate with them.

The Pope asserted, “We Muslims and Christians are called to open ourselves to others, knowing and recognizing them as brothers and sisters…. this way, we can tear down walls raised out of fear and ignorance and seek together to build bridges of friendship that are fundamental for the good of all humanity.”

When Reformers broke with Rome in the 16th century, they did not do so out of fear or ignorance but because of overwhelming convictions and intelligence. The Bible had been translated and was now available to everyone, and it was obvious that what Catholic leaders were teaching was not found in its pages. The Bible reader had been intimidated and harassed and had his pockets picked for centuries to construct massive cathedrals all over Europe.

With the translated Bible, they discovered that the Bible said nothing about Popes, archbishops, cardinals, holy water, rosary beads, hail Mary, the immaculate conception, lent, the sign of the cross, vestments, relics, statues, purgatory, limbo, penance, confession to a priest, elevation of Mary, indulgences, pilgrimages, etc.

When one gets rid of all that, he almost ends up with an independent Bible or Baptist Church!

The average Christian finally read in the newly translated Bibles that independent churches were to be filled with simple and sincere people, where someone read the Bible, another prayed. Then the preacher (not a priest) delivered a sermon followed by the singing of hymns. No liturgy, no ceremony, no mass, no richly dressed preachers. The Europeans could find very little in the Bible that reflected what they had experienced for a lifetime in their vast cathedrals.

While Pope Francis spoke of “brothers and sisters” and friendship, ordinary Christians were chaffing under sharia in Muslim nations. Many were being persecuted as Francis gushed platitudes to appease and impress Muslim fanatics. He did not demand religious freedom or even tolerance on the part of Muslims in the Middle East nations.

Francis demands that Protestants forget about the doctrines and practices that precipitated the Reformation but does not require or even suggest that Muslim leaders must make major concessions with Koranic commands that deal with hating and killing Jews and Christians or even making friends with them. No demands that female sexual mutilation is barbarity and must be stopped; no demand that honor killings are beastly; no requirements that killing any Muslim if he or she converts to Christ is criminal; and no demand for Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia to permit Christian churches (not one in the whole nation). It seems Francis is quiet about the absurd and vile teachings of Islam.

But then, Francis is a bridge-builder; however, here is one dude who will never cross that bridge.

Pope Francis is a hypocrite who is more interested in public relations than helping the hurting and Gospel-deprived people under Islamic rule. But how can he give something he probably doesn’t have?

The Pope shamelessly speaks of building bridges rather than a hated wall to keep out unwanted immigrants while he lives behind a massive wall. Did I mention that Francis is a hypocrite?

But the Pope keeps trying. He is the only person in Europe who can give an order and see it carried out by non-thinking zealots. Only the Pope can break the barriers and usher in the World Church.

For sure, I’m not going to be a part of his world church, not even if I am promised the Pope’s tiara, the keys to his Popemobile, and the combination of the Vatican vault.

I had to struggle with the combination to the vault.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

In early September of 1997, a London talk show host asked me, “Well, Dr. Boys, does that mean Mother Teresa is not in Heaven?” I gulped, thought for a second, and said, “Well, I can’t know any person’s heart but if Teresa trusted the Roman Catholic Church, baptism, or her good and admirable works to get her to Heaven, she is not there.” The hostess and the audience members gasped!

I had been asked to do the show dealing with Princess Diana since some Christian groups in England were saying that the recently deceased Diana was now in Hell. After dealing with where I thought Diana was, the host hit me with the Teresa question since the Catholic nun (known as the Saint of the Gutters) had just died. It is one thing to suggest that an adulterous, drinking, former princess was in Hell but something else to suggest that one of the most kind, sacrificing, and famous do-gooders of history might not be in Heaven!

I told the host “Good people don’t necessarily go to Heaven and bad people don’t necessarily go to Hell.” She was astounded and said, “Would you please explain that?” I was thrilled to do so. I made it very clear that people go to Heaven only by placing personal faith in the shed blood of Christ.

I was on a roll so I said, “In fact, there are people in Hell tonight who, while on this earth, lived a better life than some people in Heaven.” She was shocked again and said, “Will you please explain that?” I was thrilled to do so–again. I explained that some people are genuine Christians but are very nominal in their daily living while there were non-Christians who are more noble, kind, decent, and generous but have never experienced the New Birth. I emphasized again that people go to Heaven because they trust Christ as Savior.

There is no doubt that evangelical and fundamental Christians can learn something from Teresa who ministered to the unwanted, unloved, and uncared for. No one should be more concerned for the poor, disadvantaged, hurting, sick, and hungry people of the world than Christians. I think we could be more involved than we are although many of us give to world missions, feed the hungry, provide clean water, medical missions, go to mission fields, etc., but we could certainly do more without diminishing the essential message that only Christ saves.

Teresa did not appear sophisticated; however, she or her handlers were very astute in using the media for her own end—raising money for her cause. She had connections with rich, famous people (sugar daddies) who funded her charity according to Christopher Hitchens in The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice. (Hitchens, an atheist, did an incredible television movie titled “Hell’s Angel” that exposed Teresa. He also claimed Teresa was “a fanatic, a fundamentalist and a fraud.” Well, not like the Fundamentalists I know.) Some of those “sugar daddies” were disreputable, unscrupulous people such as Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier (who plundered Haiti), Communist Albanian dictator Enver Hoxha, Charles Keating, and other scoundrels.

One egregious example is her relationship with Charles Keating of the Lincoln S&L fame, or more correctly, shame. When his savings and loan company failed in 1989, it left about 23,000 people holding worthless bonds and cost the federal government over $3 billion. Keating was convicted in both federal and state courts in the early 1990s of fraud, racketeering, and conspiracy and served four and a half years in prison.

Keating gave more than a million dollars to Teresa and flew her around in his jet. During his trial, Teresa wrote Judge Ito telling him what a good guy Keating was and asked for leniency in sentencing. Teresa advised the judge to “do what Jesus would do.” I’m not sure what Jesus would have done, but the judge put Keating in the pokey for four and a half years!

Following the trial, Teresa received a letter from the Deputy District Attorney telling her that the money Keating had given her was stolen from hard working people and suggested that she return the money. I would have suggested, “After all, that is what Jesus would have you do.” The good nun never answered his letter (nor returned the stolen money). After all, it was for the “poor.”

It seems the nun was an opportunist, especially when it fit her agenda. Her agenda was to raise money for her charity by toadying up to rich and famous people. She raised a fortune but never built a hospital for children in India but did build convents in more than 150 countries! There has never been an accounting for the fortune she raised.

CNN reported on Teresa’s charity declaring, “It’s true there’s no transparency–and very little information available–on the group’s bookkeeping. CNN‘s request to interview the current head of the organization was declined.” But the sainthood continued.

The Catholic Church requires two “miracles” to confirm “sainthood” and one of the two alleged miracles is bogus. Monica Besra said she was healed of cancer by praying to Teresa; however, her husband admitted on video that she was healed by medicine not prayers to Teresa. In fact, some physicians claim that she did not have cancer but a cyst caused by tuberculosis. Furthermore, in an interview with Time magazine, Besra’s husband said, “It is much ado about nothing. My wife was cured by the doctors and not by any miracle.” But it seems Pope Francis was determined to have a miracle even if the facts are otherwise. Now, Besra’s husband has denied making the allegations.

The Washington Post reported of Teresa, “Her saintly reputation was gained for aiding Kolkata’s poorest of the poor, yet it was undercut by persistent allegations of misuse of funds, poor medical treatments and religious evangelism in the institutions she founded.” Moreover, the British medical journal Lancet published a critical account of the care in Teresa’s facilities in 1994, repeating what many others has reported. Many former volunteers have testified of patients receiving no pain medicine and nuns washing needles in cold water to be used again!

To her credit, Teresa was a long-time anti-abortionist and, after winning the Nobel Prize in 1979, she said in her acceptance speech that the “greatest destroyer of peace is abortion.” She also angered Bill and Hillary Clinton when she spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington in February 1994, where she argued that abortion was a mother murdering her own child! Bill and Hillary “sat there, in the glare of the hot lights, all eyes in the crowd fixed upon them, as they tried not to move or be noticed, conspicuous in their lack of response, clearly uncomfortable as the applause raged on.”

Teresa had theological problems as well as problems with principle. She was asked if she ever converted people (or only feed the hungry, lifted the poor, etc.) and she replied, “Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you’ve found God, it’s up to you to decide how to worship him.” That is heresy. No real Christian believes that.

But then, maybe I was correct on that London talk show when I suggested that she was not a Christian but only a Catholic. Just as there are many Baptists who are not Christians.

My critics will be angry that I did not call her Mother Teresa but she was not my mother. My mother was Emma and while she was not an activist in the slums of Zanesville, nor did she lift the sick and poor from the gutters, she was a godly woman who knew Christ as her savior. I am convinced she is in Heaven.

I’m not sure of “Saint” Teresa’s present location!

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published recently by Barbwire Books; to get your copy,  click here. An eBook edition is also available.