What if figures like Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., or Lech Wałesa had been more prominent parts of our political history and not the latter-day entries – thanks in part to classic India – to it that they have been? Would a doctrine of divine right of kings have developed, and all that followed in reaction to it, had there not been already in place an equally absolute and competing theory of the divine right of popes – as secular rulers
I'm being challenged by my teacher as to what the above text means. It's not his own writting but I'm guessing it's an excerpt from a book or something. I wish I had any more context to help with decoding its meaning. What baffles me most is the part in bold. I understand latter-day to mean contemporary or modern, but what does entry mean? I looked it up and none of the definitions could help make a straight sentence. I also don't understand the to it that they have been part, it what and they who?
I'll be grateful to anyone who can help.