- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
One answer is that some of the recent predictions have been remarkably accurate. Hal Lindsey, the guru of all things apocalyptic, points out in his April 8th article on WorldNetDaily that the "descriptive predictions...Though they are a bit obscure, they have fit the general profile of each of the popes." He points to the examples of the three popes before Benedict XVI: The prophecy for Paul VI "Flos Florum" (Flower of Flowers) and his coat of arms contained three fleurs- de-lis (Isis blossoms). The description for John Paul I was "De Medietate Lunae," (the Half Moon). He was baptized Albino Luciani (white light), was born in the diocese of Belluno (beautiful moon), became pope when there was a half moon (Aug. 26, 1978), and died after an eclipse of the moon.
John Paul II was prophesied under the title "De Labore Solis," (from the labor of the sun), and indeed he was born during an eclipse of the sun on May 8, 1920.
What about Benedict XVI? Lindsey's article was written before the conclave. As it turns out Saint Malachi describes him as "Gloria Olivae" meaning "the glory of the olive."
Guess what? The Order of Saint Benedict had a branch called The Olivetans.
Since Malachi became a Saint, it is presumed that everything he predicted is infallible. But some have claimed that his predictions are a forgery. If they are a forgery, then they are a pretty damned good one, considering that the last 4 of his predictions are uncannily accurate. And the next Pope, according to St. Malachi's prophecy? One called Peter the Roman, who is to be the last Pope before Rome is destroyed, and Jesus returns.
So, are the prophecies of St. Malachi for real? Or are they bunk?
Discussion?
Article is here.