Peter the Roman?
#11
Tim, he means that if the Prophesies of Malachy were true, people centuries ago would know that the Last Judgment would be scores of popes away -- something that Our Lord would not want them to know because of the salutary fear that knowing neither the day nor the hour brings.

He has a good point, in my view.
Reply
#12
I think the prophecies are bogus. No original manuscript was ever found in the Vatican in fact. And none of St. Malachy's contemporaries mentioned any such "prophecies". And no, they are quite inaccurate and even bizarre at times. The learned scholar Pope Benedict XIV for example is described as "farm animal". Dr. Prudlo is among the scholars that have written of them recently:
"The Prophecy of the Popes was “discovered” in the Vatican Archives in the 1590s, unsurprisingly during a period of multiple consecutive conclaves. It is extraordinary that the Archives, which had been under the diligent care of text-hungry Humanists for nearly 150 years, had somehow missed this singularly important document. After its publication the original text disappeared, a fact as remarkable for its carelessness as for its convenience. The issues above are enough to discount the story even before considering the internal evidence.

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."


http://www.truthandcharityforum.org/be-n...t-malachy/


C.
Reply
#13
(11-16-2013, 07:18 PM)PolishTrad Wrote: if the prophecy were real, people in the 16th century would have been sure that for the time being there would be no Apocalypse, so the Parable of the Ten Virgins, for instance, would be worthless.

St. Malachy was a bishop in 12th century Ireland, and many miracles are attributed to him during his lifetime. But his alleged vision of the future popes---if he even had one---may not have been well known for centuries. And even if it was, it doesn't mean everyone would have believed in them. And even if they did, they would not have any way of possibly knowing how long it would take to get through the list of popes. In the first years of Christianity many popes reigned for very short periods because they were constantly being killed.
[Image: itux.jpg]

We do know that St. Malachy was real and that he is a canonized saint. What we don't know is if those prophecies were actually from him. But there are other things that many Catholics give credence to even tough there is not much evidence that it actually happened.  As for the veracity of the prophecies of St. Malachy, it seems to me that there are just as many facts surrounding his vision than there are about the vision Pope Leo XIII who formulated the St. Michael prayer after a vision he had of Satan being loosed in the world. Many Catholics believe the story of Pope Leo XIII's vision, even though there aren't any solid and authoritative sources for the event even taking place. However we do know that Pope Leo did formulate the St. Michael prayer, and we can assume he had a good reason for doing so.
[Image: s4iu.jpg][/URL]


As for the list of final popes, we know it has existed for centuries. But a good question would be to ask, why would anyone would come up with such a long list of popes stretching far out into the future in the first place?I suppose that question has many answers too.

But trustworthy prophecies originating in the 20th century abound; for example, the visions of Fatima warning about the future unfolding of history, and the visions of St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy.

[Image: 8az9.jpg]

In 1934, according to St. Faustina's diary, Jesus said:

You will prepare the world for My final coming. (Diary 429)  Tell souls about this great mercy of Mine, because the awful day, the day of My justice, is near. (Diary 965). I am prolonging the time of mercy for the sake of sinners. But woe to them if they do not recognize this time of My visitation. (Diary 1160)

So, according to the Diary, the time of mercy has been prolonged---meaning that we are already in borrowed time?
[Image: awxz.jpg]

Reply
#14
(11-16-2013, 07:48 PM)triumphguy Wrote: In my opinion relying on prophecies like this is no different from relying on horoscopes: they are a futile way to try and "control" what's going on.

EVEN IF TRUE. 

Which they ain't!

I'm with you on this one TG..

Smacks of divination.
One small step away from being a 'seer' at Medjugoogoo.
Reply
#15
(11-16-2013, 09:53 PM)Armor of Light Wrote:
(11-16-2013, 07:48 PM)triumphguy Wrote: In my opinion relying on prophecies like this is no different from relying on horoscopes: they are a futile way to try and "control" what's going on.

EVEN IF TRUE. 

Which they ain't!

I'm with you on this one TG..

Smacks of divination.
One small step away from being a 'seer' at Medjugoogoo.

Agreed--one should not rely on prophecies such as these or use them as a sort of horoscope. But the prophecies  give a glimpse into the Catholic world of centuries past, which was apparently quite similar to the present, with all its visionaries, alleged visionaries and apocalyptic prophecies.  What's especially interesting about the St. Malachy prophecies is that they extend to over 100 popes into the future, and the alleged final pope on the list corresponds to our current Holy Father in office today. We living in the 21st century may very well be witnesses the end of a very long false prophecy which generations of Catholics have kept alive for centuries.

But private revelation and prophecy are part of Salvation History; Paul speaks of those who are given the gift of prophecy
to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 1 Cor. 12:10


As for "Medjugoogoo," the reality is that the Church has not decided one way or another on the matter. Now then; what happens if the Church were to find that the events at Medjugorge are worthy of the faithful to believe, as it did with the events at Fatima? Obviously people would be free to not believe; though a stamp of approval by the Church would put Medjugorge in a whole different light. As for the so-called seers of Medjugorge, they are either all in cahoots over the past 30 years in the greatest hoax in history, or it is a Satanic deception. But why would Satan call on millions to repent, to go to confession, and to pray the Rosary?
[Image: xmky.jpg]

Reply
#16
"Gabriel Serafin" Wrote:St. Malachy was a bishop in 12th century Ireland, and many miracles are attributed to him during his lifetime. But his alleged vision of the future popes---if he even had one---may not have been well known for centuries. And even if it was, it doesn't mean everyone would have believed in them. And even if they did, they would not have any way of possibly knowing how long it would take to get through the list of popes. In the first years of Christianity many popes reigned for very short periods because they were constantly being killed.
I was referring to the 16th century because it was only then that the prophecy was found (or created). And you're right that people wouldn't know how much time will the following popes reign, but they (or the person who found them, doesn't matter, he still is one person) would know that at least for 38 days (if all subsequent popes would have died immediately after being elected and sworn in, and the next conclaves would have been held the next day) there would be no Apocalypse. Which still contradicts what our Lord said. We have to be ready for the Judgment Day any second.
Reply
#17
(11-16-2013, 08:08 PM)Clare Brigid Wrote: Tim, he means that if the Prophesies of Malachy were true, people centuries ago would know that the Last Judgment would be scores of popes away -- something that Our Lord would not want them to know because of the salutary fear that knowing neither the day nor the hour brings.

He has a good point, in my view.

They do not predict the Apocalypse but the end of an Age. Something huge is coming.

tim
Reply
#18
(11-17-2013, 06:29 AM)PolishTrad Wrote: people wouldn't know how much time will the following popes reign, but they (or the person who found them, doesn't matter, he still is one person) would know that at least for 38 days (if all subsequent popes would have died immediately after being elected and sworn in, and the next conclaves would have been held the next day) there would be no Apocalypse. Which still contradicts what our Lord said. We have to be ready for the Judgment Day any second.

No, I'm afraid you got it mixed up. Jesus said that many things had to first happen before the end of the world. As for being ready day or night (because the Lord comes like a thief in the night) it means that you or I could die any moment. Tomorrow there are thousands of people who will die in freak accidents.  Tonight there will be thousands murdered. Two minutes from now thousands will die of a heart attack or stroke, etc.

As for THE end of the world, Jesus explained that there had to be many events preceding it:

“Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and, ‘The time is near.’ Do not follow them.  When you hear of wars and uprisings, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away.” Then he said to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven..."


So the list of 112 popes does not contradict anything.
Reply
#19
(11-16-2013, 11:34 PM)Gabriel Serafin Wrote:
(11-16-2013, 09:53 PM)Armor of Light Wrote:
(11-16-2013, 07:48 PM)triumphguy Wrote: In my opinion relying on prophecies like this is no different from relying on horoscopes: they are a futile way to try and "control" what's going on.

EVEN IF TRUE. 

Which they ain't!

I'm with you on this one TG..

Smacks of divination.
One small step away from being a 'seer' at Medjugoogoo.


As for "Medjugoogoo," the reality is that the Church has not decided one way or another on the matter. Now then; what happens if the Church were to find that the events at Medjugorge are worthy of the faithful to believe, as it did with the events at Fatima? Obviously people would be free to not believe; though a stamp of approval by the Church would put Medjugorge in a whole different light. As for the so-called seers of Medjugorge, they are either all in cahoots over the past 30 years in the greatest hoax in history, or it is a Satanic deception. But why would Satan call on millions to repent, to go to confession, and to pray the Rosary?

Medjugorje supporters want us to think the Church is neutral  but the 1991 statement of the episcopal conference of Yugoslavia states flatly : "on the basis of the research that has been done it is not possible to state that there were apparitions or supernatural revelations". The Church has never approved an ongoing apparition and that is not going to happen now. You wonder why Satan would call people "to repent, to go to confession, and to pray the Rosary?" Remember those are the chief characteristics of every bogus apparition in the last 50 years including, Necedah, Bayside, etc. It's quite a list really. The demons want confusion in the church and what better way is there? Do not forget the wise words quoted by Leo XIII in Satis cognitum: "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition".

C.
Reply
#20
I think the thing which most folks get confused about is all of these point to the beginning of the Apocalypse. They do not. And Yves DuPont's book which has been shown to be dubious has a heavy impact on folks. All prophecy is conditional and is proven only when it happens.

There are three which are approved that have direct bearing, LaSallette, Fatima, and Akita. Garabandal has not been approved and Medjugorie (sp.?) has not and is extremely suspect. These three are good summary of where we are right now, and are known to be Our Lady's words, except the part not revealed from Fatima.

The prophecies of Malachi of Armagh were lost in the Vatican Library, and while lost were tampered with during that time, and the Church has not approved them. If the ones which could have been tampered with while lost are omitted, the remaining ones are very curiously prophetic.

Now this is my take and no one else. Fr. Malachi Martin, who read the third secret during Pope John XXIII's reign, in those interviews said several times that a total change is coming. This has always made me wonder. It fits if Pope Peter the Roman is the last Pope by election of the Cardinals, which some other prophecies speak about.

I take this to mean either schism as in Apocalypse 12, or a total reversion to Faith almost instantly, and a more gradual conversion of the infidels.

tim
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)