New Archbishop of Canterbury: The Man to Bring Anglicans to Rome?

New Archbishop of Canterbury: The Man to Bring Anglicans to Rome?

Getty Images

The bishop of Durham, Justin Welby, will be the next archbishop of Canterbury, it was announced November 9. The archbishop has strong links with the Catholic Church, and as leader of the Anglican Communion, he could bring that church closer to Rome.

All Church of England clergy have a spiritual director. But Welby’s director is Catholic. A person will usually stick with the same spiritual director for years, meaning Welby’s religious thinking will have been heavily shaped by the Catholic Church.

During his press conference after the announcement of his appointment, Welby singled out the Catholic Church, mentioning no other groups. “Learning from other traditions than the one into which I came as a Christian has led me into the riches of Benedictine and Ignatian spirituality, the treasures of contemplative prayer and adoration, and confronted me with the rich and challenging social teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”

Welby said the greatest influence over his moral thinking was Rerum Novarum—a letter by Pope Leo xiii.

Underscoring the close ties already in place between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, the announcement of Welby’s appointment was delayed so both the Queen and the pope could be notified.

The two churches have already come much closer under Archbishop Rowan Williams. Last month, he was the first archbishop of Canterbury to address a synod of Catholic bishops.

But Welby isn’t completely Rome’s man. He supports the ordination of women bishops and is reexamining his thinking on homosexuality.

The Trumpet has long forecast that Rome would woo back her protesting daughters. But, as editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote in 2007, “biblical prophecy indicates that full unity will not be achieved purely voluntarily. At a certain point, the mother church will abandon its efforts to woo her daughters back by flatteries and instead revert to the age-old method of preserving ‘Christian’ unity by exerting physical force.”

Whether Welby’s strong links to the Catholic Church will mean that the bulk of the Anglican Church is returned to Rome peacefully, or if Rome will need to apply force, remains to be seen. But eventually the Anglican Church will be returned to Rome.

Israel Under Fire From Gaza and Syria

Is it a worrying preview of much more to come?

Tensions along Israel’s borders are running high. Hamas has fired more than 140 rockets from Gaza into southern Israel over the weekend, and on Saturday four Israeli soldiers were injured after militants from Gaza hit their patrol jeep with an anti-tank missile. Yesterday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “The world must understand that Israel will not sit idly in the face of attempts to attack us …. We are prepared to intensify the response.”

Afghanistan—Guess Who’s Not Leaving?

Afghanistan—Guess Who’s Not Leaving?


Germany has powerful strategic reasons for retaining a presence in Afghanistan.

Much publicity is being given to the drawdown of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. As to the strength of commitment to and the true nature of the drawdown, we shall have to wait to see what U.S. plan will emerge in the wake of the recent U.S. presidential elections.

Yet we ought to remember that there are other nations that have also committed troops to Afghanistan out of strategic interests of their own. Take Germany, for instance, the third-largest contributor of troops to the Afghanistan war.

As our editor in chief explained in a recent Key of David television presentation, Germany has been busy for some time building an alliance with the less militant Arab states on Iran’s western flank. From the Mediterranean to the Gulf, an alliance is being cemented by Germany to counteract the further spread of its influence over key oil states.

Gerald Flurry explains this is powerfully prophetic, being the fulfillment of the alliance between Germany and certain Arab states that is prophesied in Psalm 83. The initial revelation of that prophecy is unique to him.

With this bastion of resistance to Iran’s westward spread of its influence in the region now consolidating, the other area that needs shoring up by those who seek to contain Iran’s hegemonic initiatives is its eastern flank. This is where the outcome of the Afghanistan war becomes crucial.

U.S. withdrawal from Iraq has left that benighted nation at the mercy of Iran. To all intents and purposes, Iraq is speedily becoming a vassal state to Iran. This leaves Afghanistan as the only outpost remaining between Iran’s eastward expansion and its linkage with Islamic states to its east and south. It is thus crucial for those nations dependent on Middle Eastern and Caucasus oil supplies to arrest Iran’s eastward expansionist goals at its eastern flank.

America’s progressive withdrawal from Afghanistan risks a repeat of the Iraqi episode, with that Eurasian nation falling under Iranian imperialist dominance.

Enter Germany.

Supplying the third-largest contingent of troops in the Afghan war, Germany has a most vital interest in restraining Iranian moves to secure vital oil supplies on which the EU nations are dependent in order to diversify supply away from the singular risky source of Russia. It is for this reason that we have consistently maintained that Germany cannot afford to leave Afghanistan in the wake of American drawdown.

A quick review of Germany’s strategic commitments in the region reveals that it has become increasingly situated to fill the gap created by U.S. withdrawal from this region. In fact, the militarily strategic deployment of the Bundeswehr to the Middle East and the Eurasian periphery is an indication of just how vital such deployment is to Germany’s imperialist goals.

Via its quiet engagement in encircling the oil golden triangle in the Middle East—the German Navy being deployed in the Mediterranean, thus securing Suez, and patrolling off the coast of Lebanon securing the Levant, the German military in Sudan, the navy off the Somalian and Yemeni coastlines securing the Persian Gulf, and the military active in Afghanistan—Germany is in a prime position to present itself in the role of an in-area peacekeeper in this hottest spot on the planet.

Germany also, via strategic deployment in these localities, retains a prime bargaining position for access to Mideast oil as an offset to dependence on Russia. At the same time, it maintains an actively deployed strategic readiness to secure future Middle East oil assets and guarantee safe passage to the black gold via Suez and the Adriatic Sea—the one protected by German naval deployment securing the Mediterranean, the other by virtue of an implicit alliance with Albania, one of Germany’s Balkan proxies.

Thirdly, and soon to be most important of all, Germany’s deployment in Afghanistan gives it a prime strategic location from which to press the inevitable attack on the one nation that threatens the overall stability of the Middle East and, through its terror-sponsoring activities, the rest of the world—Iran!

Germany’s ambivalence to any moral standard in the conduct of its activities in Afghanistan, let alone any other theater vital to its national interest, is readily shown in the strategy it has adopted in the Hindu Kush. In this situation, as in the Balkan Peninsula wars of the 1990s, it is not the moral argument so much as the strategic imperialist/military reason that dominates.

“To vanquish its enemy, Germany has regularly cooperated with forces, which were powerful enough to win wars, but whose social qualities are diametrically opposed to a humane development in the region targeted by German interventions. This had been the case in Afghanistan in the 1980s when, within the framework of the Western alliance, the Federal Republic of Germany helped support the Afghan Mujahedeen fighting pro-Soviet forces in Kabul and the Soviet Army. The consequences are well known. … A similar outcome can be expected from Berlin’s current cooperation with Afghan warlords to maintain control at the Hindu Kush …. This brutalization of social relations corresponds to the logic of warfare, in as much as, not the most humane, but the most barbaric forces are the more promising allies, who, in the long run, become the most influential forces shaping the future” (, November 1).

Keep watching for Germany to strengthen its encirclement of Iran, the biblical king of the south, and to close in on Jerusalem, surrounding it with armies (Luke 21:20). This is a most powerful sign of the imminence of Jesus Christ’s return!

Election Reflections

Election Reflections


Amid all the commentary and analyses on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, one prophetic overtone escapes all the pundits.

The demographers have concluded that women, youth and voters of foreign birth were instrumental in swinging the vote toward the reelection of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency. President Obama won 55 percent of women’s votes, 60 percent of voters aged between 18 and 24, and 71 percent of the Hispanic vote.

An end-time prophecy for the Anglo-Saxon nations came immediately to mind when I heard that analysis: Women and children shall rule over them (Isaiah 3:4, 12), and “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low” (Deuteronomy 28:43).

America was a nation carved out by the courage, tenacity, inventiveness and sheer hard work of the Anglo-Saxon peoples. The heaviest ethnic component of this stalwart group of pioneers were the Manassites, an expansionary Israelite tribe (read The United States and Britain in Prophecy for proof of this).

The nation’s Founding Fathers authored a Constitution for the establishment of the nation based on biblical guidelines. The guiding force for its moral base was the book we call the Holy Bible. The language was that of mother England, the law modeled largely on British precedents based on British Crown Law.

The nation thus built became the greatest economic, industrial and military force in the world, bringing its might to bear on the victorious outcome to two great world wars against tyranny.

Sadly, America’s great economic success encouraged a culture of hedonism at home following World War ii which, over ensuing decades, succeeded in breaking apart the very foundational building block of any decent society—the nuclear family.

The result was that youthful rebellion against parents became entrenched in American society, the child being permitted disproportionate influence over the parents, and being kow-towed to by fashion, music and entertainment, their perverse likes and dislikes even having bearing on the forms of education offered them.

In tandem with the shock of the youth culture, feminism raised its ugly head. Women began to assert themselves over an increasingly weakened male population, depleted of much of its strength by two world wars.

Then came the later phenomenon of the immigration of incompatible ethnic groups into America.

Unlike earlier movements of Shemite migrants from Britain and Europe—groups prepared to integrate with the dominant Manassite population—the later migration of ethnic peoples, unwilling to speak the native tongue, be educated in the U.S. heritage, nor accept its religion and culture, began to dislocate the nation from its founding principles.

America ceased to exist as “one nation under God” in practice.

The upshot was that the once mighty U.S., lacking collective commitment to an overriding positive vision of its destiny, stopped winning its wars, increasingly withdrew from battle and ceased to even supply adequate and timely protection for its diplomatic forces in the field.

With its infrastructure fraying beyond fixing in the wake of increasing curses of storm, wind and fire, its commerce largely stolen by those who once were the beneficiaries of its economy, its financial base teetering on the brink of massive collapse, the U.S. is today a sad and increasingly sorry witness to the results of mass rebellion against the source of its once manifold blessings—the great Creator God.

Thus it is that the outcome of the elections for its national leader are now vested largely not in the hands of strong, masculine leadership, but rather decided by the feminized vote, the inexperience of youth and the self-interest of the stranger who dwells amid its gates.

The outcome is a continuing reinforcing of the phenomenon of degradation of national leadership, even as the prophecy loudly declares, “O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths” (Isaiah 3:12).

Study our booklet No Freedom Without Law for deeper insight into the reasons for the state of today’s society, and the solution to it.

Russia’s Stranglehold on European Energy

Russia’s Stranglehold on European Energy


Meet Rosneft—Russia’s third-largest oil conglomerate that is about to buy out tnk-bp. This strategic move will not only propel Rosneft to the top of Russia’s oil industry, but it will also make both of the nation’s largest oil and gas companies state owned.

tnk-bp is currently co-owned by British oil firm BP and a Russian group of billionaire investors called aar. According to Marin Katusa of Casey Research, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s oil company Rosneft is about to purchase BP’s 50 percent stake in tnk-bp. The move will cost Rosneft approximately $27 billion in cash and stock. At the same time, Rosneft is trying to purchase the other 50 percent stake from aar, although this deal is yet to be finalized. In the end, according to Reuters, the deal as a whole will be worth $55 billion.

If the deal succeeds, it will be the largest purchase since Exxon bought out Mobil over a decade ago.

Even though the terms of the agreement dictate that BP will retain a 19.75 percent share in Rosneft, it is clear that Putin is seeking to nationalize Russia’s oil production through this acquisition. Rosneft is already Russia’s largest oil producer. With this merge, Putin will have even more influence over Europe’s energy needs. According to Katusa, “If Rosneft does buy tnk-bp, the state oil giant will pump almost half of the barrels of oil produced in Russia.”

Leaving a small percentage to BP will also allow Rosneft to maintain a choke hold on its oil supply to Europe. Europe’s reliance on Russia for oil and gas may prove to further the influence of Rosneft and Russia as a whole in the near future.

As of October 2012, Russia is the number one oil producer in the world, just ahead of Saudi Arabia. Russia currently supplies 34 percent of Europe’s gas needs through its other state-owned gas giant, Gazprom. With Putin at the helm of both Gazprom and Rosneft, it is easy to see how Russia could soon wield its power and withhold its supplies of oil and gas at will.

Watch for Putin to continue to work behind the scenes to build up his nation into an energy-rich superpower through the privatization of its major exports and industries.

To better understand the future role Russia will play on the world scene, read “The Key to Understanding Russia,” and request our free booklet Russia and China in Prophecy.

Petraeus Resigns as Questions Remain About Benghazi

It’s been two months since the terrorist attack in Benghazi and still many questions remain unanswered. The big news this weekend has been the sudden and shocking resignation of cia director David Petraeus because of marital infidelity. According to some reports, fbi agents are furious that the decision to remove General Petraeus was delayed until after the U.S. presidential election. Many others are also wondering why the resignation happened just one week before Petraeus was scheduled to testify before Congress about the Benghazi cover-up.