M
Matt33
Guest
I was wondering if the Prophesey of the Popes by St. Malachi is an approved thing to believe in? Thoughts?
- Status
L
Like
Guest
Absolutely NOT!:nope:
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
Some have said that they are fraudulent.
However, they were NOT known during or immediately after his lifetime.
A contemporary biographer, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, makes no mention of them.
They weren’t even published until 4 centuries after he died.
What do all these things tell you?
Of course, those who delight in gloom, doom, and rumors of boom will eat them up, as they feed their paranoia.
However, they were NOT known during or immediately after his lifetime.
A contemporary biographer, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, makes no mention of them.
They weren’t even published until 4 centuries after he died.
What do all these things tell you?
Of course, those who delight in gloom, doom, and rumors of boom will eat them up, as they feed their paranoia.
S
Shin
Guest
Hmm? You are allowed to believe in it or not.
It is approved to be distributed. Whether it’s received more approbation than this I do not know, but it is at least purportedly by a saint and referred to be learned and holy men.
What it actually means on the other hand is open to question.
It is approved to be distributed. Whether it’s received more approbation than this I do not know, but it is at least purportedly by a saint and referred to be learned and holy men.
What it actually means on the other hand is open to question.
M
Matt33
Guest
I have gotten so much confusing infro on this? I have also heard that teh idea of “the last pope” was added later?
Is there a condemnation of this prophesey?
Is there a condemnation of this prophesey?
S
Shin
Guest
You will find the prophecy listed here in the Catholic Encyclopedia.
It is also listed in the similar version of this Encyclopedia on Catholic Answers.
There is no condemnation.
Whether it is accurate or not… wait one Pope and see.
S
Silvereel
Guest
Most scholars that I have read talking about it seem to think that the ‘last Pope’ part was added at a later date than the rest. The other part is probably accurate, but I would be careful about that last one personally.
Now, even if it were there, it doesn’t mean that he has to come after Benedict… there could be many Popes between them. Perhaps only the Popes up to Benedict was revealed, then the last. This doesn’t mean he will directly succede the current Pope, though.
Now, even if it were there, it doesn’t mean that he has to come after Benedict… there could be many Popes between them. Perhaps only the Popes up to Benedict was revealed, then the last. This doesn’t mean he will directly succede the current Pope, though.
E
Eucharisted
Guest
The Malachi prophesy has not been approved. I find it strange, though, that some Catholics are living their lives around it, or according to it, or waiting for it to be fulfilled. I know all the old “tricks” used to justify the prophesy too: ‘Oh the next Pope will be the last Pope,’ ‘Oh the last Pope won’t come for a while, after many other Popes comes,’ ‘Oh the antichrist will take over the Papacy.’ Such deception truely comes from the Devil, and it only takes a weak understanding of the Faith to be impressed by his lies. I pray that more Catholics learn and live the Faith.
M
Matt33
Guest
Please can those who say it is not approved provide some kind of source for not subscribing to it? Or those who say it is ok provide a source too? I know everyone probably has an opinion of “end times” prophesey but I want to know if it is ok for someone to believe in it. That is is not condemned in a catholic encyclopedia article is helpful but not definitative.
M
Matt33
Guest
E
Eucharisted
Guest
Prophecy of Malachi spell?
Question from on 09-15-2007:
Please tell me if you know anything about this Is it true that it has been prophecied that this will be the last pope? I read something on the internet that is not a Catholic website and was wondering if this is true or false?
Any info would be appreciated. Thank you.
**Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 09-16-2007: **
Amy, Wherever you read this, someone is playing God rather superficially. Fr. Bob Levis
Source: ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=515280&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2007&Author=&Keyword=malachi&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=3&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=
M
Matt33
Guest
That is the “official condemnation”?
M
Matt33
Guest
I think so far the New advent encyclopedia wins.
S
Shin
Guest
I meant ‘referred to by’ not ‘referred to be’, sorry for the typo earlier.
Whenever I hear ‘scholars’ have a problem with something of the saints of the past, I approach their ‘problem’ with high skepticism because I have seen many times a revisionism for the sake of the destruction of various writings rather than a fair minded approach.
There are many ways to interpret the prophecy of St. Malachy to not include that Peter is the last Pope, but perhaps the last Pope
It appears Fr. Bob is reacting to the particular interpretation put forth rather than displaying a knowledge of the prophecy.
In fact whenever I hear about ‘scholars’ and the problems with the prophecy I think everyone is simply referring to the same one book that says some ‘scholars’ have a problem with the prophecy, without actually being people who look into the details. Other ‘scholars’ do not have a problem with the prophecy’s origins. In other words the problem is with the prophecy and not with the origin of it, they disagree with it in and of itself in some fashion or another.
I have no particular adherence or non-adherence to the prophecy. My thought is simply, wait and see. There are ways to interpret it in which the next Pope is, or is not the last.
If the next Pope takes the name Peter II, which would be highly unusual that would fulfill that part of it, but there are other ways a Pope could be a Peter II, and that includes restoring all the damage done through the Church with papal teachings on the level of St. Peter, etc.
Whenever I hear ‘scholars’ have a problem with something of the saints of the past, I approach their ‘problem’ with high skepticism because I have seen many times a revisionism for the sake of the destruction of various writings rather than a fair minded approach.
There are many ways to interpret the prophecy of St. Malachy to not include that Peter is the last Pope, but perhaps the last Pope
It appears Fr. Bob is reacting to the particular interpretation put forth rather than displaying a knowledge of the prophecy.
In fact whenever I hear about ‘scholars’ and the problems with the prophecy I think everyone is simply referring to the same one book that says some ‘scholars’ have a problem with the prophecy, without actually being people who look into the details. Other ‘scholars’ do not have a problem with the prophecy’s origins. In other words the problem is with the prophecy and not with the origin of it, they disagree with it in and of itself in some fashion or another.
I have no particular adherence or non-adherence to the prophecy. My thought is simply, wait and see. There are ways to interpret it in which the next Pope is, or is not the last.
If the next Pope takes the name Peter II, which would be highly unusual that would fulfill that part of it, but there are other ways a Pope could be a Peter II, and that includes restoring all the damage done through the Church with papal teachings on the level of St. Peter, etc.
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
There are two questions here, different, but related.
- Are the prophecies attributed to St. Malachy 400-500 years after his death (the first reference to them) really by him?
- If they are not by him, are they authentic prophecies by an unknown person/s?
- If they weren’t attributed to him until centuries after his death (when they were first mentioned) it might be prudent to doubt that he is responsible for them.
- Not knowing their origin, it might be prudent not to pay them much attention.
- Status