Interpreting the "prophecy of the popes" in light of Malachi Martin's statements on Fatima

We'll start with a quick disclaimer: I'm not Catholic or even Christian. I don't particularly believe in these prophecies as a person of faith might. I do love a good prophecy of doom as good as the next guy though, and I also believe there is a poorly understood higher order to the universe that underlies most religious and paranormal mysteries (which means that for me, a prophecy doesn't have to be literal and doesn't have to strictly adhere to the doctrine from which it arose).

Now to get right to the point, here's my stab at how these prophecies could come together:

What if there were an attack on The Vatican during the conclave, as some might suggest is predicted by the 3rd Secret of Fatima? Well, if it prevented the selection of a new pope, that would leave the Vatican Secretary of State in charge- in this case Tarcisio Pietro Bertone, from Romano, and probably change a few people's opinions of the 3rd Secret of Fatima, in one fell swoop.

The prophecy of the popes is often cited as consisting of 111 numbered entries and 1 unnumbered final entry (Though I cannot find a source on these numbers though- they are not in this image of the page from Lignum Vitae shown on Wikipedia).

If however Petrus Romanus is the only unnumbered title in the original prophecy, it begs the question of why; A question that might be answered by the ambiguity of the 3rd Secret of Fatima as released by the church. The 3rd secret of Fatima includes the shooting of a Bishop in white, but not explicitly of a Pope, though Lucia says that's the impression she had.

I doubt Bertone has any chance winning in a conclave- he's only 7 years younger than the pope, and they generally take a longer-serving pope after a short reign. He's also got too much political baggage from Vatileaks, and it's even possible that the same people targeting him have something to do with the fact that the pope is stepping down. Bertone is described as the pope's main collaborator, and this pope is from the conservative line that doesn't play well enough with others to make a decent "whore of Babylon".

So it is possible that the NWO is making a play for the Church which could end up actually destroying the organization and leave Petrus Romanus in charge of a much smaller and less structured flock. This also pairs nicely with lightning striking St Peters when Benedict announced his coming abdication- perhaps not as a reproach of the announcement so much as a sign that God is done working out of that building now.

And here's one last thought for you. In his first interview with Art Bell, Malachi Martin said to watch for a sign in the sky between Winter 96 and Spring 97, which would give us an idea of the timeline for the chastisement which at that point Martin said, "seemed to be foreshortened" (Martin also said the Catholic Church would not be recognizable by 2000 and suggested a couple times in the 1996 interview that something was coming up in just a couple of years). However in the same interview, he drew the line on the Anti-Christ as "not 20 years distant".

So we're coming up on the final falsification of Father Martin's statements, but there's still room for it if he was wrong about the foreshortening. And I'd say that a big fireball hitting Russia while we await what might be the last pope is a sign from the sky well in line with Fatima- which was after all a warning to consecrate Russia.

I don't think there is any question left to most sensible people that something is going on. Its up to the individual groups of people to decide what context to take it in.

As for me? Strange days are here, and they are only gonna get stranger. We certainly will know more once the new pope is selected!

Quick question. Is the last pope supposed to be the antichrist, or is he controlled by satan himself with close ties to the antichrist? According to the prophecy, of course!

I like to discuss a good doomsday prophecy too. I dont beleive in Saint Malachy's prophecy and also I read herethat the the last pope was this one and that 112, Peter Romanus was added by the Benedictines because they didnt want the last pope to be from them.

That aside, I asked in another thread if the pope takes some kind of vow regarding holding his office for the rest of his life, and if he does then the fact that he has forsaken his vow might make him a non-pope or false pope, in which case the next one would be 111 "the glory of the olive", not ex-Benedict.

I dont follow astrology either but I read something about a 13th zodiac: Ophiuchus. This is a large constellation located around the celestial equator. Its name is from the Greek Ὀφιοῦχος "serpent-bearer", as you know the serpent has been equated with satan in the Bible, and the antichrist is supposed to be completely possessed by satan (look up "moonchild"). I wonder if this constelation is going to be in an auspicious position on Feb 28?

reply to post by jude11


[SNIP]I'm sure you can accept the fact that prophecies tie in rather closely to religion. No matter how you cut it.

I am in no way a religious person, but c'mon! the lightning?!?

Just kidding, btw.

Originally posted by wondermost
I don't think there is any question left to most sensible people that something is going on. Its up to the individual groups of people to decide what context to take it in.

As for me? Strange days are here, and they are only gonna get stranger. We certainly will know more once the new pope is selected!

Quick question. Is the last pope supposed to be the antichrist, or is he controlled by satan himself with close ties to the antichrist? According to the prophecy, of course!

The last pope should be a joyful moment for all pedophile victims, their families and all children that may never be subjected to these crimes against humanity that the Pope so quickly attempted to hide and bury.

When this Elitist criminal organization has finally disappeared from this World, our kids will be a little safer and hopefully their ill gotten gains of the people's wealth will be returned to the people instead of redistributed amongst the wealthy.

Wishful thinking.

Peace

reply to post by jude11


[SNIP]


@ OP.... Interesting, I have been loosely paying attention to this... What exactly IS the third sign? And what did you mean by consecrate Russia?
I am by no means a theology expert, but my instincts tell me the Vatican has always been a pretty dark place, with a lot of secrets.
I'm not sure how much of this is self-fulfilled by those who want to bring on some "End of days" theatre on earth.
The power of belief is something not to be taken lightly, neither is the power of suggestion.

Thanks for your input though, has gotten me interested in looking into this a bit deeper. I usually leave doom up to the other guys, personally still waiting on the false alien invasion.

reply to post by wondermost


Well, I think the next pope will be the lamb, that will make way for the false Shepherd.

Should the prophecy is fullfilled, of which seems to be on target as of late. The most likely candidate for the Antichrist may very well be the once and future king.

Source: Grailcode.net - Author: Clinton Ortis



Below is his coat of arms, defined in biblical terms, that is.



Peace

reply to post by InnerPeace2012


I was going to reply that I just do not see him as an Antichrist or a bad person, I actually get a good feeling when I look at his image.
But as I was typing it dawned on me if there was one person on this planet that could deceive the masses into believing he is the second coming it would be the son of Diana.

reply to post by oddnutz


From the link provided, it is mentioned that he is groomed as a host for the revival of the devil himself, perhaps through a ritual sacrifice by the illumanati.

Me thinks he may not even be aware that he is the best candidate for the devils reincarnation.

Peace

Thanks for all the interest. It's been a while since I've had a thread take off so quickly.

Just to be clear I'm participating as a member here, I'm not speaking for or about the site, the rules, or any official ATS business- nor do I insist on any particular dogma- I'm prepared for just about any prophecy to fail, be fulfilled, or prove to be an overstated but apt metaphor for a longstanding problem that must eventually come to a head.

Now to continue our regularly scheduled program all ready in progress,
reply to post by wondermost

To the best of my knowledge (as a guy who hasn't read the entire bible and hasn't read any of it at all in years) there is no explicit prophecy in the Bible that Satan will possess a pope or anybody at all for that matter. It talks about a beast who is wounded and miraculously healed, and a false prophet who causes people to worship the beast. The beast seems to be a physical authority ("who can make war with him?) while the term prophet speaks for itself.

Malachi Martin, who plainly stated that he was not a prophet) did say that a ceremony had been conducted for the explicit purpose of enthroning Lucifer in St Peters and transfering the spirit of Satan into a final pope.

reply to post by Cinrad


I tend to think that the prophecy was probably created in 1590, and along with that I like the idea that the final line was probably added later, but I actually come at it from the other direction. I think the Benedectines would be perfect candidates to forge a prophecy (or alteration of an existing prophecy) not only to get one of them elected pope at that time, but the appoint the eve of the coming of God as their time of glory (one more point of influence in the conclave perhaps) and after that they had 5 years before publication in which to decide that they needed to drive home the point that there would be a pope right up until the end by explicitly mentioning the pope during the tribulation and then actually saying "the end".

Ophiuchus goes from the end of November to mid-December, so I don't think there can be any connection- I haven't had time to check on the Moon child thing though so if something other than the sun being in Ophiuchus could be relevant then there's still some checking to be done. (my power supply just burnt up so I'm gonna be offline for a day or two in just an hour- i know that sounds like a ridiculous excuse for not googling, but I swear to it)

reply to post by ThinkingCap


If you mean the Third Secret (I don't believe I mentioned a 3rd sign unless I typoed) it is part of a prophecy in 3 parts, alleged to have been given in 1917, partly written down finally in in 1941, and except for the 3rd secret, which was not supposedly written down until 1943.

The first two prophecies were not made public until after they were fulfilled, so they actually could have been written later, if one wants to go that way.
The first secret was just a description of hell.
The second secret was a prediction of both the end of WWI and the beginning of WWII, but it said that WWII could be prevented if certain prayers were said (consecration apparently being a ritual performed by the pope) and if Russia was converted to Catholicism.

The third secret is a vision of a bishop in white, probably the pope, going through a ravaged city then up a steep hill towards a cross, where he is shot by soldiers along with many other church people. It was supposed to be made public in 1960 (having been written in 43, given to a bishop in 44, kept by him till 57, then held for 3 years, until 1960 when Rome declared that the prophecy would not be released as planned and would probably remain sealed permanently. In 2000 it was released, however, what was released in 2000 may have been incomplete or fake. It did not completely meet the expectations built by supposed leaks from priests (including Malachi Martin, who claimed that the 3rd secret "doesn't make any sense unless we assume a wholesale apostasy in the Catholic Church"), although it did deal with a great persecution as was expected .

Petrus Romanus.
The Rock of Rome.

For fun, we can take the name of "Rome" and replace it with the Homophone "Roam" as in to move about with no defined direction.

Loosely associated with the word "Roam", could be the word "Roll"; also describing movement.

We thus get Rock n Roll.

Pope 112 will be the Rock n Roll Pope.


This post (above) was in no way, shape, or form, meant to be serious.
A bit of humor.

Ah, but, wouldn't it interesting IF pope 112 just happened to be found to have some association of character with Rock n Roll?

On a more serious note; it's been mentioned one of the favorites to succeed Benedict XVI is Ghanaian Cardinal Turkson. His first name is Peter.
Peter Turkson - wiki
He'd also make our first black Pope.

Black Man as Pope

Cardinal Turkson has said that "if God would wish to see a black man also as pope, thanks be to God". The Catholic Church chronicler Rocco Palmo called Turkson the lone Scripture scholar in the Pope's "Senate" and believes that his status as a potential "papabile" has been elevated due to his appointment as spokesman for Second Synod for Africa in 2009. With the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI in 2013, Turkson is seen as a papabile (potential successor) in the upcoming papal conclave.

Edit:

Immediately following the announcement on 11 February 2013 of the impending resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, at least two bookmakers, Paddy Power and Ladbrokes, made Turkson the favourite to be elected as the new pope, with Paddy Power giving 2/1 odds.
Turkson has also been mentioned in regards to St. Malachy's apocalyptic list Prophecy of the Popes, given that its final Pope is named Peter. Odds of 4/1 are given.

reply to post by The Vagabond

Ah the glory of the 'I'll leave'.

I too feel instinctively that if this prophecy is to come about as written, then Peter of Rome could well be the one you suggest. Maybe the conclave will not choose anyone and be stalemated, in which case, Peter of Rome would be the one to run the show for some time. He seems like a powerful person, maybe too powerful as he seems to be in charge of the inner workings of the place. With this though one has to wonder just when the great apostacy will happen, as the RC church appears to be growing.

As for the lightning strike, it happened a few hours later, but as some have noted, it is not an unusual event, as it has a lightning rod atop the dome and is the highest point in that area.

I would like to hear more about the third Fatima secret, but from all I've read, it has not been revealed but only guessed at?

reply to post by aboutface

I'll leave... I love it. Also good catch on the lightning being common- I hadn't even caught the lightning part in the news (TV probably made more of it) so when I heard about it second hand I guess it just captured my imagination lol... not that TV would have kept me grounded.

Growth in the church is not necessarily mutually exclusive with apostasy- it only requires that the church start teaching apostasy, although I suppose there is room for semantic debate over just how popular it has to be before we just call it a policy change instead. There are various schismatic sects of Catholicism which claim that the RC church is a false church- many of them pinpoint it to the Second Vatican Council. A few of them even have their own "popes", though I don't know just how popey they are... I hope they are better than those self-declared governments we get here in the US.

The 3rd Secret might have been revealed in whole or in part in 2000, but there are inconsistencies, several of which are mentioned at the wikipedia link above. Here is a YouTube link for about 8 minutes of coast to coast am clips where Malachi Martin explained what he could about the secret to Art Bell (this is before the release in 2000)

Anyway the battery is about dead so I guess that's it until sometime tomorrow or the next day.

the next chosen Pope will notbegin his Papacy as a 'beast' or Satanically driven...the new Pope will be a good person


in Revelation it is told that after the new world leader, a charismatic, peacemaker on the world stage receives a mortal head wound but survuves...only then is it revealed that he is the 'beast' a man of dark words and blaspheme....in league with and indeed inhabited by the spirit of Satan himself...

now, the new Pope could become the man of perdition found in the final book of Revelations...or perhaps not


events will chose the person to become the AC...not the other way around.
see, historically both Napoleon & Hitler tried to become the AC but did not... the conditions of the times and the totality of natural events at those men's attempts for being the true AC were not present...

i.e. the "holy ghost" must be taken away only then can the true great deception and the great apostacy (falling away) take place, which coincides with the rise to power of the AC and the building of the 10 headed End-Time kingdom


The late Father Malachi Martin used his insider insights to alert those who would listen, but i am afraid he had no gift of prophecy from the Diety only predictions in the way that Gerald Celente 'sees' trends


so... events may or may not cause the Pope to become one of the two 'beasts' in Revelations
it is thought that the Pope would be the 'beast-man' that arises out of the sea (a symbolism for the spiritual waters of religion & in particular the Roman Cathoic Church, the western leg of the Statue found in Daniel)
whereas the Eastern leg of the revived Empire is located in Instanbul (another city of 7 hills, the former Constantinople) is the cradel of the Orthodox Church-.....

these two divisions of the Eastern/Western church may be just where the Two despots : AC and False Prophet arise from

As per Malachi , I have a feeling the next pope will name himself Marcellino e Pietro (Marcus) after www2.fiu.edu...

and in this ...finds yet another way for England to slip into the role of Pope undetected ony to bring the downfall.

-the downfall will have much to do about / from the infiltration and documents in the recent year that have been stolen from the Vatican by the 'assistant' faux-roman Paolo Gabriele in which will prove the morally bankrupt cardinals, bishops and others involved in sexual abuse of those in privilliged and unchallenged roles within the clergy, banks and other elitist royalty.

The outrage of such will cause such a witchhunt as never seen.

reply to post by InnerPeace2012


That dissection of the Prince William's coat of arms does not all make sense. What is the significance of the chain and the harp of David? David used his harp to calm king Saul when he was tormented by evil spirits. The reference to the chain is to lock up the evil spirits.

1Samuel 16:22.23 Then Saul sent a message to Jesse: "I like David. Let him stay here in my service." From then on, whenever the evil spirit sent by God came on Saul, David would get his harp and play it. The evil spirit would leave, and Saul would feel better and be all right again.