The World and Everything in It: April 25, 2025

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Good morning!

The funeral tomorrow for Pope Francis prompts questions about legacy, leadership, and the future of the Roman Catholic Church.

NICK EICHER, HOST: We’ll talk about that on Culture Friday … and about the Supreme Court case on the rights of parents in public schools. John Stonestreet is standing by. Later—

IMPERIAL AGENT: With the right ideas, planted in the right markets, in the right sequence, we can now weaponize this galactic opinion.

A review of the next installment of a Star Wars prequel to a prequel.

And your listener feedback.

BROWN: It’s Friday, April 25th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

BROWN: Time for news now with Kent Covington.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Trump on Russia-Ukraine situation » President Trump is calling on Russia’s Vladimir Putin to suspend deadly attacks in Ukraine for the sake of peace.

His remarks came after Russia launched a missile and drone assault in Kyiv and beyond on Wednesday night killing at least 12 people.

Trump told reporters:

TRUMP: I didn't like last night. I wasn't happy with it. And we're in the midst of talking peace and missiles were fired. And I wasn't happy with it.

His rebuke of Putin was a notable shift with much of his recent criticism aimed at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Zelenskyy said Thursday:

ZELENSKYY: We were attacked. Our territory was occupied. Tens of thousands of people were killed. Many children and adults buried alive. And the fact that Ukraine is ready to sit at a negotiations table after a complete ceasefire, with the terrorist that did it all on our land—exclusively on our land—this is a great compromise.

Trump with Norwegian Prime Minster / trade / China » President Trump’s remarks came as he hosted another European ally at the White House.

TRUMP:  Thank you very much. It's a real honor to have the highly respected, the great Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway with us today.

Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre spoke with the president about peace in Ukraine and, of course, about trade.

Trump said Norway has a $2 billion dollar trade surplus with the United States, and he wants to fix that. But he said he’s confident that they’ll work out a new trade deal.

He also said his administration is now holding trade talks with China.

TRUMP:  They Had a meeting this morning, so …

REPORTER: Who's they?

TRUMP: I can't tell you. It doesn't matter who they is. Uh, we may reveal it later, but they had meetings this morning and we've been meeting with China.

That contradicted a statement from a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, who just hours earlier claimed there were no talks happening between the two countries.

That also follows recent reports that China had not reached out to Washington to start trade talks. If negotiations are taking place, it’s unclear who initiated them.

States sue over tariffs » Meantime, a dozen states led by Democratic attorneys general are suing to try and block the president’s sweeping tariffs.

The suit accuses President Trump of overstepping his legal authority by imposing them.

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield called the tariffs “unlawful”

RAYFIELD: They’re chaotic and harmful to the hardworking families and businesses that make our state thrive. And they are not just numbers on a page. They are real costs in all of our wallets, your workplace, and all of our future.

The president invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose the import taxes.

Congress passed that law in 1977 to give the president the authority to respond to economic threats during peacetime.

The states bringing the lawsuit argue that only Congress has the power to implement such sweeping tariffs.

Trump earlier this month paused the majority of the tariffs for 90 days amid trade talks.

Trump administration SCOTUS appeal on trans military ban The Trump administration is asking the US Supreme Court to allow enforcement of a ban on so-called transgender service members in the military. WORLD’s Christina Grube reports.

CHRISTINA GRUBE:  An executive order from President Trump — along with a Pentagon policy, effectively bars people who identify as the opposite sex from serving in the armed forces.

The Obama administration was the first to change the rules to allow people with gender dysphoria to serve openly.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who herself identifies as openly LGBT … ruled that the Pentagon cannot enforce the ban.

She asserted that ending the military service of those who identify as transgender … would damage their reputations and careers.

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to let the ban take effect as the legal battle plays out.

The high court has directed the plaintiffs to respond to the administration’s request by Thursday.

For WORLD, I’m Christina Grube.

I'm Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: our weekly conversation with John Stonestreet. Plus, your feedback on some of our recent coverage.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Friday the 25th of April.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. It’s Culture Friday.

Joining us now is John Stonestreet. He’s president of the Colson Center and host of the Breakpoint podcast. Good morning.

JOHN STONESTREET: Good morning.

EICHER: The death of a pope is always a major story. And with the funeral of Pope Francis set for early tomorrow morning, there’s a lot to talk about—his legacy, and what may come next.

I thought the media coverage followed a predictable script: portraying Francis as a groundbreaking figure—marked by humility, compassion for the poor, and progressive political stances. He was often described as a reformer, someone who tried to rebrand Roman Catholicism for the modern age.

But some argue that his most famous line was this—“Who am I to judge?” Those words fairly summing up a papacy more characterized by equivocation than clarity.

So John, how would you summarize the legacy of Pope Francis? And how should we, as non-Catholics, think about it both as a cautionary tale and a wake-up call?

STONESTREET: I think it’s going to be left to time to see what the legacy of Pope Francis is. What I mean by that is, Who comes next?

If Pope Francis has successfully stacked the college of cardinals, the conclave then emerges with another more progressive figure than he was—then it will be a groundbreaking papacy. In my view, not in a good way. But it will be something distinctly in a new direction, and that’s because the two popes that preceded him were strong on both truth and love.

I think that’s really the question about Francis: He was crystal clear on things like helping the poor. I’m not sure he was always humble about it—there is a way of being proud of your humility, and sometimes he kind of struck me that way. He was portraying that righteousness in public.

But it was a distinctly different direction in terms of doctrinal clarity on some of the important cultural issues than the two that came before him—Pope John Paul II and Benedict who followed him. I don’t think either of them should ever be accused of not helping the poor. I mean, the social services, the Catholic juggernaut was already well in place. So Francis’s reputation for being known by that has to do with the fact that he was willing, “to get his hands dirty.”

He had some remarkable moments early on. In one of his first public worship experiences was a young man with significant disability. The pope reached out and cared for him. There’s a wonderful image of a young girl with Down Syndrome wandering to the front as he is offering a homily—and he allowed her to sit with him and holding her hand.

These are beautiful images, but he majored in a lack of clarity on issues of doctrine, ethics and sexuality. I mean, just the question, “Who am I to judge?” You’re a pope! This is literally your job description, you know? I don’t even agree that there should be that position within the church hierarchy. But if you accept it, it literally is a position of judging between right and wrong and clarity for the cultural moment.

He refused to do that. So it created a lot of confusion—that confusion’s been evident.

I mean, his cracking down on American bishops who tried to offer some ethical clarity on sexual issues; his refusal to, for example, rein in the German bishops, and they’ve already gone further, by mandating same-sex blessings, even in the days after Francis passed away.

So I think it’s that lack of clarity. That in and of itself is the wake-up call. Carl Trueman’s take in First Things was that essentially Francis led a papacy of of modern Protestant liberalism.

I think there’s a lot to say, disconnecting yourself from the hierarchy, acting kind of in an air of moral superiority on a personal level while untethering from the sources of authority that you claim to represent. It’s inconsistent.

And the question is, was he an anomaly or is this a new direction?

BROWN: Now, when we talk about papal legacy, it’s hard not to think back to Pope John Paul II. He had enormous influence—not just within the Catholic Church, but far beyond it. His courage in confronting communism, his clarity on moral issues like abortion, his unapologetic stand for truth—even many evangelicals who obviously disagreed with Catholic doctrine still admired him.

So John, talk about what made John Paul II so respected, again, even among non-Catholics.

STONESTREET: Well, you listed the issues: Doing all of those and not choosing between truth and love.

That’s the lie of our age: If you’re truthful, you’re not loving; if you’re loving, you’re not truthful. The only way to hold those two together is to be a person under authority and to respect that authority.

There’s also something of the cultural moment—about being called to a cultural moment and rising to that calling. So you would not have, I don’t think, the legacy of Pope John Paul II had we not been dealing with the global conflict over communism and the West. Seeing that as an area of moral clarity and stepping into that and saying what was true—at least in terms of totalitarianism and the role of the church and being able to make some of those distinctions.

Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II were both men of their times and I think it shows in their times and places. The Argentinian Marxist influence on Francis is clear. That has, I think, marked his legacy. For John Paul II, in the context of Poland under the thumb of the Soviet Union coming out of the Second World War, there’s something about that historical context that’s really important.

Of course, as Christians, what we believe is that God is precise about those times and places—both in our lives and as he’s orchestrating redemptive history. Those things really matter. Rising to that occasion or becoming overwhelmed by the cultural forces makes a big difference and tells the story between these two popes.

EICHER: This week, the Supreme Court took up a case out of Maryland that will resolve a really important question: Can the government force elementary-age kids to read LGBT-themed storybooks in public school ... despite the religious beliefs of their parents? This was a religiously diverse group ... including Muslims, Roman Catholics, Ukrainian Orthodox, and Protestants. They’ve been fighting a policy in Montgomery County, Maryland, that requires children as young as 3 and 4 to sit through lessons on gender identity and same-sex relationships. The school district used to allow parents to opt out—but not anymore. John, some say this is just about being exposed to ideas. But that can’t be all this is. What do you see at stake in this case—and how should Christian parents think about their responsibility when it comes to public education?

STONESTREET: The most fascinating part of these hearings was basically how broadly and how many different questions were covered by so many different justices. I found all of the exchanges absolutely fascinating from Katanji Brown Jackson to Elena Kagan to Neal Gorsich to Brett Kavanaugh. You listen and you think—wow—there really is about as big of a divide here as you can possibly imagine.

In other words, questions like what is sex? What is a child? Who does a child belong to? Who has rights here? What is the relationship between discrimination and freedom? Just fascinating.

You’re like, put it out in front for everyone. What’s going to happen is going to be a walloping of the Montgomery County School district. I hope so.

Every once in a while, a state official says the quiet part out loud—and this attorney was forced to do that. Four or five times.

What’s at stake? I think it’s this: Will the court at least finally rule or at least be definitive on who children belong to?

It’s clear that state authorities consider parents obstacles to bringing children up in the way the state thinks they should go—that children ultimately belong to the state, not to parents. No parent can tolerate that, no parent can accept that, because that is a door that when cracked will go wide open. The number of demons and devils that will come through that door, we just can’t even imagine.

If children aren’t worth fighting for, good heavens, what on earth would be?

I think that’s what’s absolutely at stake here.

The state is not good at raising kids. The state does not have the kids’ best interests in mind. The state has the state’s best interests in mind.

Parents have the kids’ best interests in mind, and that needs to be determined.

How should Christian parents think about their responsibility when it comes to public education? I’ll just tell you that their kids belong to them. They are the ones that have been tasked with stewarding lives. What is most important is what’s best for the kids—and it is impossible for me to think that Christian parents who have the option should continue to put up with this nonsense.

There’s a reason there’s been an incredible exodus, even from non-Christian parents. You have to say, look, if they can see it, why can’t we see it? Stop thinking about your kids as being “missionaries” when they’re 5, 6, and 7, when they’re being put under forces of indoctrination, and you are being removed from the process.

There’s no way on earth that this is the way forward.

So, look, I think every Christian parent should take time to listen to these oral arguments. Listen to the questions, listen to the answers, and it could not have been any more obvious as far as I’m concerned.

BROWN: John Stonestreet is president of the Colson Center and host of the Breakpoint podcast. Thanks, John. See you next time.

STONESTREET: Thank you both.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Friday, April 25th.

Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day.

Good morning. I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

Coming next on The World and Everything in It: A return to a galaxy far, far away—where the Force may be fading, but the politics are getting sharper.

BROWN: The Star Wars franchise has stumbled in the Disney-Plus era. The Mandalorian won hearts—but fired actress Gina Carano over her personal political views. Critics accused Disney of putting progressive ideology ahead of storytelling.

Then came last year’s series The Acolyte, widely panned by fans for weak writing and heavy-handed themes.

EICHER: That's why all eyes are on Andor. The first season won critical acclaim. But will Season 2 be enough to bring disillusioned fans back to the franchise? Here is WORLD arts and culture editor Collin Garbarino.

COLLIN GARBARINO: The television series Andor is a bit peculiar: It’s a prequel to a prequel. The series follows the adventures of Cassian Andor, the rebel agent first introduced in the 2016 Star Wars prequel Rogue One. Rogue One depicts the events leading up to the original movie from 1977. In the first season of Andor, we saw Cassian get recruited by the fledgling Rebel Alliance. Now actor Diego Luna returns to the role to finish telling Cassian’s story.

CASSIAN ANDOR: The Empire cannot win. You’ll never feel right unless you’re doing what you can to stop them.

This season has 12 episodes, divided into four story arcs. Each three-episode arc moves the action one year closer to the climactic Battle of Yavin when Luke Skywalker blew up the Death Star. It's a sprawling series with multiple plot lines that all begin to converge the closer we get to Yavin. 

CASSIAN ANDOR: I need to go home.

KLEYA MARKI: No. Don’t do that.

CASSIAN ANDOR: Come again.

KLEYA MARKI: It’s very crowded there right now.

CASSIAN ANDOR: What does that mean?

The action bounces around the galaxy, and sometimes Cassian’s story takes a backseat to other characters’ political intrigues and spy craft. Sometimes the secret rebel leader Mon Mothma and the undercover rebel agitator Luthen Rael take center stage. They’re once again played by Genevieve O'Reilly and Stellan Skarsgård respectively.

MON MOTHMA: What are you doing here?

LUTHEN RAEL: I’m afraid that’s a secret.

Imperial characters also get their share of attention. Especially the unlikely couple Dedra Meero and Syril Karn who tried to hunt down Cassian in Season 1. In some ways, this imperial storyline becomes the most compelling one in the show. 

DEDRA MEERO: Propaganda will only get you so far. You need a radical insurgency you can count on.

The show really understands the duality of mankind’s dignity and fallenness. Dedra and Sryil may have chosen to fight for the dark side, but we still get glimpses of their humanity. In fact, they might be this season’s most sympathetic characters. The rebels are technically the good guys. But this show complicates their heroism by emphasizing the less idealistic side of rebellion.

CASSIAN ANDOR: I’m here to meet a friend. Where is he?

REBEL: We ask the questions.

This show somehow manages to stick more closely than other spin offs to the gritty feel of the original Star Wars, while at the same time giving audiences something new. This isn’t the Star Wars of lightsaber-wielding Jedi. This version of the galaxy is full of smugglers, spies, and compromised bureaucrats. Showrunner Tony Gilroy might have made a name for himself as the writer responsible for the Jason Bourne movies, but Andor could be the best espionage thriller he’s created so far.

IMPERIAL AGENT: With the right ideas, planted in the right markets, in the right sequence, We can now weaponize this galactic opinion.

We see misinformation campaigns, false flag operations, and politicians who dither in the face of tyranny. We even see imperials trying to manage their own immigration issues.

BRASSO: How soon?

FARMER: They finished there today… so tomorrow.

BRASSO: Are they checking visas?

Many viewers will think Gilroy has based the show’s themes on our present situation. But much of the season was actually inspired by the Nazi occupation of France and the French Resistance. This setup might sound strange, but it works.

That said, there are a couple of things that don’t work so well. First, halfway through the season we get a lesbian kiss… this though the LGBT storyline is almost nonexistent through the rest of the series. It kind of confirms the joke that’s floating around the internet in which Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy continually demands, “Put a chick in it, and make her gay.”

The other problem is that the series ends on a whimper. The six middle episodes are strong, full of action, intrigue, and emotion. The final arc peters out as it tries to tie itself to the Rogue One movie.

These complaints aside, Andor Seasons 1 and 2 remain in the top tier of Star Wars television Probably surpassed only by the first season of The Mandalorian.

Despite the critical acclaim, the first season of Andor had relatively low ratings. I expect this season will struggle to find an audience too. Old Star Wars fans might skip it since Disney has mishandled their beloved franchise so badly. Fans of espionage thrillers probably won’t watch either since it’s packaged as a Star Wars show. It’s a shame this compelling spy drama might stay in the shadows.

I’m Collin Garbarino.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Friday, April 25th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: And I’m Myrna Brown. Up next, Listener Feedback for the month of April. We begin today with a couple corrections and clarifications.

EICHER: March 27th in a commentary on education we referred to the Department of Education and interchangeably used the initialism DOE. In the great bowl of alphabet soup that is the federal bureaucracy that particular spoonful belongs to the Department of Energy and it’s ED that stands for Department of Education. Easy to mix up, especially in a system where the acronyms multiply faster sometimes than the agencies themselves. But no excuses.

BROWN: Correction from yesterday: we took listeners to two seder celebrations but misidentified one of the traditional dish is the sweet mixture of nuts and apples meant to represent the bricks and mortar is actually called Charoset. We have updated the program transcript to reflect the correction. Listener Joe Swann of Cross Plains, Tennessee was one of many who really liked the story.

JOE SWANN: I wanted to say that I thoroughly enjoyed the story: A Tale of Two Seders, by Travis Kircher that you ran on April the 24th, especially so because we hosted a seder meal for my Sunday School class on Good Friday Evening. It was a wonderful story and keep up the good work.

EICHER: Our piece on Earth Day the interview with regenerative farmer Joel Salatin drew lots of response. Salatin critiqued industrial farming and raised the question of how God might respond to our treatment of the earth—citing DDT as an example.

BROWN: That caught the attention of listener Gideon Griswold. He enjoyed the interview but thought the DDT reference missed the mark:

GIDEON GRISWOLD: Correct me if I'm wrong, but that hasn't been in wide use since 1971. I've been working at a small business that does pesticide for eight years now, and I can say that the pesticide industry has strictly regulated their frequent inspections, and we work with this stuff every day, so there's a strong incentive to keep it safe and sustainable.

It’s true, DDT was banned in the U.S. in 1971. And although it’s still used in specific cases here and abroad the EPA notes that long-lasting residues remain a concern. Still, the example might’ve landed better framed as a legacy issue.

EICHER: We also heard from David Holden a pest control and crop advisor in California for decades. He found our piece too one-sided:

DAVID HOLDEN: All these problems have been addressed and are being worked on and have been worked on for many, many years. That's part of science, learning how to correct what you don't know. I've been a believer for all those years and I feel that I've also been a person who has taken the Lord's admonition to manage this planet well.

One more listener note this from Jace Dunagan—a regenerative farmer and first-time listener. He says he loved what he heard, especially the storytelling style. He’s long believed that if conservatives could match the emotional power of NPR-style reporting, it would be a game-changer. But in his words, this podcast does even better—because it not only shares the struggles we all face, but points to the real solution: the eternal hope of Christ.

Thanks Jace! Glad you found us!

BROWN: On to another story that drew lots of positive feedback: our long-form interview with author Cam Lee Small. Listener Les Alsterlund and his wife are adoptive parents and say that they welcomed the honesty: that while adoption is good, it’s often difficult.

LES ALSTERLUND: There are challenges that people just cannot understand who are not also walking the adoption journey to. Something Cam brought up is having support. If your church does not have this already, I want to encourage listeners who are adopted parents to start a small group for adopted families at your church. You should not walk this journey alone. You need the encouragement and prayers of others who are walking with you.

Another adoptive dad had this to say:

SCOTT ROBERTS: This is Scott Roberts from Walnut Shade, Missouri. I'm so thankful for stories like this. Thanks for all you do and the resources that you connect us with. I'm planning to get the book and get it to my son and see if he can learn some, be able to get through some of the trauma that he's faced through this. Thanks again.

EICHER: One more comment:

TODD: This is Todd Teisling from Des Moines, Iowa. I just wanted to give you some positive feedback about the excellent news stories particularly regarding the national security group chat and the stories regarding immigration and some of the ripple effects and concerns on those issues, I greatly appreciate the balance and the perspective shared in these stories and the refusal to cheerlead particular agendas.

Before we go today, we learned a few weeks ago some sad news: That one of our regular guests over the years died on April 4th Cedarville University history and law professor Marc Clauson who frequently joined us for Washington Wednesday:

CLAUSON:“Look, you got to do something about this. You can't just keep people indefinitely, because we have a right to a speedy trial.” So it's an issue, but it's not a big issue at this point. But I think it could have the potential for being bigger in the future.

CLAUSON: Yeah, election integrity, I think, is crucial. If we don’t have confidence that our elections take place freely and completely fairly and openly, then we begin to lose confidence in the whole system itself.

CLAUSON: There is a statute that purports to prevent a president who's charged with a crime and convicted, certain kinds of crimes, to be ineligible to run for president again. However, the Constitution in Amendment Eleven does not say anything about any prohibition against the president running again, period.

Marc Clauson was 69 years old, and will be greatly missed by his family, his students, his church and his friends at WORLD.

BROWN: If you have a comment to share you can email editor@wng.org. You can include an audio file attachment to your email and we’ll consider it for air. You can even phone it in at 202-709-9595.

And that’s this month’s Listener Feedback!

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s time to say thanks to the team members who helped put the program together this week:

Mary Reichard, David Bahnsen, Bob Case, Mary Muncy, Kim Henderson, John Wilsey, Leo Briceno, Onize Oduah, Grace Snell, Ericka Andersen, Leah Savas, Travis Kircher, Cal Thomas, John Stonestreet, and Collin Garbarino.

Thanks also to our breaking news team: Kent Covington, Mark Mellinger, Lynde Langdon, Steve Kloosterman, Lauren Canterbury, and Christina Grube.

And thanks to the Moonlight Mavens ,the guys who stay up late to get the program to you early :Carl Peetz and Benj Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Harrison Watters is Washington producer, Lindsay Mast and Leigh Jones are our feature editors, Paul Butler is executive producer, and Les Sillars our editor-in-chief.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

The Bible says: “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” —Romans 6:23

This Weekend, let’s worship with our brothers and sisters in Christ, in church, on the Lord’s day and Lord willing, we will meet you right back here on Monday.

Go now, in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.