Skip to comments.Benedict XVI Is the Second-to-Last Pope, Says Irish Prophet Malachy
Posted on 09/14/2009 2:54:34 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
The prophecies of the Irish saint Malachy, the 12th century bishop of Armagh who predicted all the popes, have thrilled and dismayed readers for centuries. He has stated there will be only one more pope after the current one, and during his reign comes the end of the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Was Malachy a Jehovah’s Witness? Learn sumpin’ ev’ry day!
ping for home
I don’t think so- I believe he was Catholic.
Correctly interpreted, it is end of the age — not world. It means the end of the Catholic Church on earth prophesied by someone recognized as a saint. Suppose then that prediction is considered infallible.
I find it fascinating that St. Malachy, back in the 12th century, was able to accurately predict every single Pope.
strange and interesting.
Well I’ve pretty much seen most everything else, except the start. why miss the end
Actually, there are several places that says the world will end...here is one example:
1.2 Peter 3:10
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
If the Religion Mod would let me the language would be far worse. This guy didn’t predict crap.
We tend to lose the distinction, between “world,” which is the nations, peoples and creatures of the planet, with the planet itself.
The planet doesn’t end. The created inhabitants and all their works, do.
My faith believes the Last Judgment in heaven took place in 1757 and the process laying the foundation of the Lord's New Church began in 1771 with the publication of the last of Swedenborg's writings which explain the doctrines of the Lord's New Christian Church.
The actual second coming can be considered on several levels. As an individual, within spiritually. This is something we can prepare for. Second, on a global level, events will play out as they do.
What's interesting to me is that there are some branches of the Church founded on Swedenborg's doctrines that believe the second coming of Christ will take place in person -- which is unusual because Swedenborg wrote that it would be by revelation only.
My personal belief is that there are a LOT of folks in place with mighty spiritual powers that are diagnosed as mentally ill and medicated. Some too are evil souls. My own healing ministry targets these folks to help them realize their place in the Lord's kingdom.
At one time, I made foolish statements here on Free Republic that I was the Messiah. I never changed my screen name -- its still there in my posts. Today, I just consider myself a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Messiah nonsense was just my old ego talking out of school.
You can check my home page for details about my Church.
Saint Malachy's predictions are no different than Nostradamus. They are so vague that it becomes easy to find some aspect of the prediction that seems right. God sake lets just let dump the College of Cardinals when Pope Benedict passes and let some half azzed writer from The Weekly World News figure out who Saint Malachy picked.
No need to be surprised. I’m only posting the threads on that subject. Lots of similar opinions (to yours) on them.
In Catholic theology, the Christian era is the End Times and we are obliged to be spiritually prepared not just for our own death but also for the end of this world.
I thought there was supposed to be a black pope in there.
I’ve surmised that this last pope will be an evil man.
Do you really believe that anyone who lives a good life, whether or not they have accepted Jesus into their lives, goes to heaven?
Heaven is a ‘big’ place. No one is condemned for not knowing Jesus on earth — they will have an opportunity after their body dies to learn and love the Lord. Perfection in diversity.
“It means the end of the Catholic Church on earth prophesied by someone recognized as a saint. Suppose then that prediction is considered infallible”
Sorry, but you suppose wrong. In the Catholic Church only the Pope can proclaim something claimed to be infallible, and only under a certain circumstance known as speaking “ex-cathedra;” meaning “from the chair.” Speaking ex-cathedra is a formal undertaking, and does not apply to everything a Pope may say. The term is easily researched. You might do so rather than suppose about such things.
(I don’t believe in ex-cathedra infallibility, BTW.)
“I thought there was supposed to be a black pope in there.”
Actually there have been three. The first was St. Victor.
Oh, Dave. That is so wrong.
Matthew 16:28, 24:34
Moreover, those who just confess the name of Jesus on the lips and live evil selfish lives are going to heaven. Funnier are those that belive a fellow like Fidel Castro has plans to confess on his last breath and be saved? Please.
I assumed the writings of saints were considered part of the faith. Guess there's a loophole.
Just because a saint said something, doesn't make it infallible.
And the "St. Malachy" prophecies are probably a forgery written centuries after St. Malachy.
Fallibility? I’ve studied Catholic contemplative teachings but never got into their whole theology and such. I have enough to study with my own religion.
Thanks, but that's not completely true either. Ex cathedra Papal decrees are infallible, but so are solemn definitions of general councils (e.g., the canons of the Council of Trent). Also, the Pope and the bishops together can teach infallibly even when not gathered in a council.
The Catholic Church does not attribute infallibility to saints. Only Popes and the bishops in union with him are infallible, and only when teaching the content of the Faith which must be believed by everyone, always, and everywhere.
Most saints have not been theologians and were not involved in a teaching office—i.e., they have not been a pope or a bishop. St. Thomas Aquinas, generally considered the greatest theologian of all time, held a number of views that the Church later rejected. Most famously, he did not affirm the Immaculate Conception, which was widely held but not solemnly defined at the time.
Moreover, the prophecies of St. Malachy cannot be infallible because they have nothing to do with the content of the Faith.
Can we stay at the end and see the beginning again?
“At one time, I made foolish statements here on Free Republic that I was the Messiah.”
I presume Obama straightened you out!
That is the root of your problem.
I spent some time in meditation on this this evening. I recalled the name of the 'last' pope from the article:
In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End."
Last weekend (and the week before I think), EWTN aired a movie called 'Karol, the Pope the Man' which starred an actor named Pieter who played Pope John Paul II. In my experience, these are the kind of 'gotchas' in prophecy that I find funny in an innocent sort of way. 'The timing of the release of this article is highly suspect!' :)
I have EWTN playing picture-in-picture on my computer monitor to witness the consummation of the age.
I would also apologize to anyone that took offense to my comments upthread yesterday. I lead a monastic life and a few worldly affairs had my attention. Some of my comments were inappropriate. I do not wish to change anyone's belief in God.
Saints are not infallible.
And the “prophecies” only appeared a couple hundred years after the bishop died.
The weird part is that a lot of them fit the popes AFTER they were discovered. Logically, of course, it means it’s only a self fulfilling prophecy.
Malachy’s prophecies are given some attention, but Peter Romani is not one of Malachy’s prophecies. It is written in a different hand, perhaps centuries later. Even if the addendum is also prophetic, there is nothing to suggest that what it describes happens immediately after Malachy’s prophecies.
If one IS to read Malachy’s prophecies as apocalyptic, it certainly seems anti-climatic to discover that “the glory of the olives,” a phrase used by St. Paul to refer to the ultimate consolation and reconciliation of the Jews, refers only to the fact that a pope bears a tie to a nickname for a religious order.
They don't have to be infallible...The question is: are they accurate???
Pardon my ignorance, I’m not Catholic, saw some program on Malachy’s predictions. I do think we’re at the end of an age and can believe there will be much turmoil coming in the next few years.
1. The end-times comments are not germaine to St. Malachy’s prophecies., but are a centuries-later addition.
2. No endorsement from the Catholic church can be inferred from the fact that someone was made a saint, only that he was not a heretic or sinful. Since there is no claim by St. Malachy that the predictions are given him by Christ, etc., he can be wrong without being sinful or heretical.
3. There are whopper presumptions, not in the text of even the corrupted, extended prophecies, which are behind the notions expressed by many interpretations.
4. Even if, on some level, St. Malachy’s statements prove predictive, their predictive usefulness may be exceedingly limited. “The Glory of the Olives” is used as a term by St. Paul for referring to the Jews, in reference to their end-times conversion. Yet the supposed fulfillment of this prophecy with St. Benedict is his tenuous links to an order of priests known informally as Olivetans.
In any event, any predictions whatsoever of St. Malachy may or may not be true but would, at best, be "private revelation" and therefore not required to be believed. Many of us believe in Marian apparitions but we are not required to believe in them. Public revelation was complete with the Apocalypse or Revelations, the last book of Scripture.
St. Thomas Aquinas, remarkable though he was, was wrong on several scores but unquestionably a saint nonetheless. His errors were of a scientific nature (i.e. when life begins) or were as to doctrines not yet mandatory in his lifetime.
St. Malachy's predictions have proven remarkably accurate in many respects but he never predicted when the world would end. The accuracy of his predictions in recent papacies would be reflected in such as: Paul VI (family name Montini) was described as the mountain; John XXIII as the Rose (most prominent feature in his family coat of arms); John Paul I as de Mediatate Lunae (of the half moon) which had long been thought to be a reference to some notable conversion of Muslims but turned out more likely to be related to the extreme brevity of his papacy; John Paul II (Labor Solis, the work of the sun) a reference to the brilliance of his papacy (concededly not perfect but stunning nonetheless).
Since many of St. Malachy's names for popes are not the sort of thing that the cardinals would know in advance, it does not seem likely that the predictions have caused the election of specific popes. John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI could not have been identified in advance of election by the prophecies as three examples.