Another post related to St. Malacy and Peter the Roman
I have done a fair amount of analysis of the prophecy and documented most of it in my ‘The Next Pope‘ book.
Interpretations are always subjective so I will not go into them now … such as whether a certain pope was Hungarian, was a monk, born during an eclipse etc.
Let us just stick purely to verifiable facts with definite, unequivocal, TRUE|FALSE, YES|NO criteria.
The St. Malachy ‘Prophecy of the Popes’ with its 112 mottos, the first applying to Celestine II (#166) [1143-1144], includes mottos for antipopes.
Thus, the sixth motto, ‘Ex tetro carcere,‘ is meant to apply to Antipope Victor (IV) [1159-1164].
<By the way that was the second antipope with that same name, the other having tried to hold office for a few months in 1138.>
So far, so good?
After Victor (IV) there were 3 antipopes in succession.
Paschal (III) [1164-1168], Callistus (III) [1168-1178] and Innocent (III) [1179-1180].
Look it up. This is incontrovertible. Innocent (III) was a ‘bona fide‘ antipope.
So, PLEASE, look at the mottos after that for Victor (IV).
Motto 7 is for Paschal (III).
Motto 8 is for Callistus (III).
Motto 9 is for Pope Alexander III (#171) [1159-1181].
HANG ON. What was that? Pope Alexander III?
What happened to antipope Innocent (III)?
Ah, ah, ah … there is NO MOTTO for him.
Why don’t folks acknowledge this stuff?
Basically the papal sequence is BROKEN as of this point … after motto 8. But, folks, bless them, persevere.
But, it gets better — or should I say worse?
At this point anybody who likes to think logically would discard the list.
Oh, but no. People press on … because … we must get to Peter the Roman that will oversee the fall of Rome!
So … lets carry on … KNOWING that we already have inescapable break in the sequence.
Motto 36 applies to antipope Nicholas (V).
Motto 42 to antipope Clement (VII).
Motto 43 to antipope Benedict (XIII).
These and the intervening popes are in proper sequence.
Motto 44 applies to antipope Clement (VIII).
Motto 49 applies to antipope Alexander (V).
Armagh, Armagh WE HAVE A PROBLEM!
Clement (VIII) didn’t come ahead of Alexander (V).
After Benedict (XIII) … came Alexander (V) … and after him the buccaneering John (XXIII) … after that Clement (VIII)!
So Clement (VIII) is WAY OUT of sequence.
OK, I am not sure about YOU, but there is only so much irrationality I can stomach.
To me the Malachy prophecy is MALARKEY given these DEMONSTRABLE, incontrovertible ERRORS.
Sorry. But, we all must have our own set of core values.
Prove me wrong. Show me how what I have laid out above is wrong?
Don’t get mad with me. I am only doing what I know. Dealing with facts.