It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
During three years at Armagh, as St. Bernard writes, St. Malachy restored the discipline of the Church, grown lax during the intruded rule of a series of lay-abbots, and had the Roman Liturgy adopted.
St. Bernard continues: Having extirpated barbarism and re-established Christian morals, seeing all things tranquil he began to think of his own peace. He therefore resigned Armagh, in 1138, and returned to Connor, dividing the see into Down and Connor, retaining the former. He founded a priory of Austin Canons at Downpatrick, and was unceasing in his episcopal labours.
Early in 1139 he journeyed to Rome, via Scotland, England, and France, visiting St. Bernard at Clairvaux. He petitioned Pope Innocent for palliums for the Sees of Armagh and Cashel, and was appointed legate for Ireland. On his return visit to Clairvaux he obtained five monks for a foundation in Ireland, under Christian, an Irishman, as superior: thus arose the great Abbey of Mellifont in 1142. St. Malachy set out on a second journey to Rome in 1148, but on arriving at Clairvaux he fell sick, and died in the arms of St. Bernard, on 2 November.
The most famous and best known prophecies about the popes are those attributed to St. Malachy. In 1139 he went to Rome to give an account of the affairs of his diocese to the pope, Innocent II, who promised him two palliums for the metropolitan Sees of Armagh and Cashel. While at Rome, he received (according to the Abbé Cucherat) the strange vision of the future wherein was unfolded before his mind the long list of illustrious pontiffs who were to rule the Church until the end of time. The same author tells us that St. Malachy gave his manuscript to Innocent II to console him in the midst of his tribulations, and that the document remained unknown in the Roman Archives until its discovery in 1590 (Cucherat, "Proph. de la succession des papes", ch. xv). They were first published by Arnold de Wyon, and ever since there has been much discussion as to whether they are genuine predictions of St. Malachy or forgeries. The silence of 400 years on the part of so many learned authors who had written about the popes, and the silence of St. Bernard especially, who wrote the "Life of St. Malachy", is a strong argument against their authenticity, but it is not conclusive if we adopt Cucherat's theory that they were hidden in the Archives during those 400 years.
Be Not Afraid: Catholic Families and the Prophecies of St. Malachy
That the prophecies are attributed to St. Malachy are an example of Pseudonymity. The author adopted the name of a real saint — but one who was not too well known — to publicize his texts more widely. The “Prophecies of Joe the Curial Bureaucrat” did not have quite the same ring to it. Pseudonymity was a common tactic in the pre-modern world, but was quickly falling out of favor. One needs only recall the Gnostic gospels as an example (“A gospel by Thomas the Apostle? I’d better read that!”) Further, this was an age that was hungry for prognostications, the most famous of which were those of Nostradamus. Astrology and divination of all sorts fascinated even some of the greatest minds of the period. In that sense the “prophecies” are perfectly suited to their time.
When one begins to consider the contents though, the problems multiply. A person who picks up the “prophecies” will be astounded at how spot-on accurate they are until one arrives at 1590. After that they turn into short, vague utterances that a local horoscope page would be embarrassed to print: “Undulating man,” “Religious Man,” “from a good religion.” These are a selection of the absurd post 1590s entries, which many have correctly called unworthy of the name “prophecy.” To take one egregious example, the phrase “Farm Animal” was supposed to apply to the brilliant light of learning, Benedict XIV. I am surprised the author did not include “Tall Dark Stranger” in his list.
Our forger eventually got bored around entry 112. Safely out of range of his lifetime, he brought the work to a quick end with an obligatory apocalyptic reference to Peter II (Peter the Roman). Unfortunately for us, we are currently on entry 112, leading to an efflorescence of worry and warnings to get ready for the end times. The only positive thing I can say about this is that finally — after our next pope has ended his reign — we will hear no more about this issue. When the new pope is announced however, many will try feverishly to shoehorn that person into the mold of “Peter the Roman.” (Is his Baptismal name Peter? Does he like “Rock” music? Is he “Roman” Catholic?)
Originally posted by FortAnthem
The new pope is from Argentina, the new world, and has taken the name "Francis I".
Lets see them try to twist THAT into fitting the Peterus Romanus prediction.
On the other hand, he is a Jesuit so we now have a Black Pope. Or maybe two black popes since that's what they call the head of the Jesuit order.
I'm so confused.
Years ago, some French experts have concluded that the prophecies of St Malachy were in fact from NOSTRADAMUS! It explains many things you are talking about. He used the St Malachy name to avoid the wrath of the Church.
In addition, PETRUS ROMANUS could be just the name of THE PAPACY ITSELF as if it was no more important to personaly describe each pope after Benedict XVI (Gloria Olivae) since a great event related to the END TIMES would change the world beliefs such as the coming of someone like the Christ's PARACLET / GREAT MONARCH / KING ARTHUR / CROWNED WHITE HORSEMAN, and THE EXTRATERRESTRIALS.
Who Wrote The List Of Future Popes - Nostradamus Or Saint Malachy?
There are two versions of the Malachy's list - one contains 111 and another one 112 Popes. The list of the future Popes ends with the number 111 (or 112 if we consider another list), and critics argue that not Malachy, but someone else put the 112th Pope into the list many years later. This is possible, because the list had been kept unnoticed in the Vatican's archives for more than 400 years. After its rediscovery the Vatican authorities said that the list had been a fake.
The last Pope, however, is not numbered. The prophetic motto about Petrus Romanus may be longer than all other mottos and this gives us a feeling that the number is missing (Gloria Olivae).
Critics also say that Nostradamus created the list and camouflaged his identity, because the Catholic Church was very oppressive in those times - all people with certain extraordinary (psychic) abilities were persecuted. Thus, Nostradamus might use de Wion as a disguise.
Nostradamus' prophecies are written in verses (so-called Quatrains), which are very difficult to understand, and their interpretation can have a hundred directions. One argument that supports the notion that Nostradamus disguised himself (as Malachy or de Wion) is the time when the Malachy's prophecy slithered to light - shortly after Nostradamus died (1566) - that is, in the year 1595. The second argument is that Arnold de Wion lived at the same time as Nostradamus and they could know themselves.
Malachy does not say anything about Black Pope, but one Quatrain (C6Q16) in the book Les Propheties written by Nostradamus may indicate the arrival of Pope that is related to something that entails blackness:
That which will be carried off by the young
Hawk, By the Normans of France and Picardy:
The black ones of the temple of the Black
Forest place Will make an inn and fire of
Nostradamus' prophecies are divided into centuries (cycles of time). It is clear from the above verses that Nostradamus spoke in riddles. The term "Black Pope" does not come from him but rather from people who tried to decipher his prophetic Quatrains.