What follows is divided into 17 parts, each of which can be read in full on the webpage that the link takes you to.
Part 1 gives the background of Malachi whose Prophecy of the Popes ends with the prediction that the last pope would be Petrus Romanus, in whose reign Rome would be destroyed and anti-Christ and the false prophet bring in the Tribulation period. The narrative opens using a fictional almost novelistic technique in which the reader feels the feelings and thoughts of Malachi at a crucial moment in his life, then goes on to give the key facts of his life and career, using a combination of fact and novelistic description of real events. Read more: Part 1
The author weighs the possibility that part of the prophecy may be a forgery fabricated around 1590. The first known publication of the “Malachy Prophecy of the Popes” was published in 1595. The first seventy or so predictions are vaticinia ex eventu (prophecy from the event). It seems someone irrevocably altered the original medieval document and the original is either hidden away or lost to history. The 1595 text is examined in Part 2 (see link below). Though published 400 years after the original was written, it very well could be the work of Saint Malachy coarsely corrupted by a forger. The post publication predictions show astonishing, sometimes jaw-dropping, fulfillments. Indeed, we are currently at 111 out of 112 and the prophecies seem to have increased in precision over time. Read more: Part 2
Acrostics, Anagrams, and a Real-Life Conspiracy Code?
Of the two layers of historical context discussed prior, now the lower older level demands our attention. While we can see ample motivation for the forger-redactor to modify the pre-1590 phrases, there is no logical reason that a sixteenth-century forger would craft a list so long into the future. Even more so, there is no good reason he would forecast the destruction of Rome when the papists have an obvious vested interest to the contrary. This is a powerful argument that the post-1595 prophecies are indeed an accurate representation of the original document. We will likely never know for sure who wrote the original but it very could have been Malachy. The reason the post publication prophecies have a different character and a stranger, ironic, even sarcastic realization is that they are very likely the genuine article. Read more: Part 3
From Christians to New Agers, skeptics to historians, the world is presently enthralled with what will happen during and following the year 2012. In general, the excitement (or dread, as the case may be) surrounds a variety of predictions made by ancient and modern sources concerning a portentous moment in time. Read more Part 8
In his uncharacteristically explosive response to Cardinal Bertone—Dear Cardinal Bertone: Who Between You and Me is Deliberately Lying?—we first discover how, after significant time and investigation, Antonio Socci concluded the Vatican had withheld an important part of the Fatima revelation during its celebrated press conference and release of “The Message of Fatima,” June 26, 2000.
Socci describes in the introduction to his book how at first he truly believed the Vatican’s official version of the Fatima Message, prepared at that time by Cardinal Ratzinger (current Pope Benedict XVI) and Monsignor Tarcisio Bertone (possible next and final pope), which with its release to the public claimed to be the final Secret. Then Socci came across an article by Italian journalist Vittorio Messori, entitled “The Fatima Secret, the Cell of Sister Lucy Has Been Sealed,” and a series of questions cast suspicions on the Vatican’s authorized publication for which Socci had no answers. Why would Messori, whom Socci describes as “a great journalist, extremely precise…the most translated Catholic columnist in the world,”[i] want to challenge the Church’s official version of the Third Secret without good cause, he reasoned. Not long after, Socci came across a second similar thesis published in Italy by a young and careful writer named Solideo Paolini, which convinced Socci to begin a probe of his own focusing on the biggest question of them all—was a portion of Lucy’s hand-written document, which contained the principal words “of the Blessed Virgin Mother” concerning end-times conditions at Rome, being withheld from public view by the Vatican due to its potentially explosive content? Read more Part 9
Sister Lucy Trapped Inside
A “Mafia Code of Silence”
We ended the last entry by admitting that something unnerving did in fact seem to be happening around and with Sister Lucy in the lead-up to the release of the so-called Final Secret. After all, the first two parts of the Message of Fatima had been publically issued by her Bishop in 1941, and the Third Secret sent to the Holy See with instructions that it be made public in 1960. That year was chosen according to Lucy because the “Holy Mother” had revealed to her that it would then be when “the Message will appear more clear.” And lo and behold it was immediately following 1960 that Vatican II set in motion what many conservative Catholics today believe is a crisis of faith in the form of Roman heresies.
And though there could have been much more to the revelation than just a Vatican II warning, and the Secret was not released in 1960 as it was supposed to be anyway (so we may never know), when Pope John XXIII read the contents of the secret, he refused to publish it, and it remained under lock and key until it was supposedly disclosed in the year 2000. If the first two Secrets were any indication of the scope and accuracy of the Third one, they had been amazingly insightful including the “miracle of the sun” that was witnessed “by over 70,000 persons (including non-believers hoping to dispel the apparitions), whereby the sun itself [seemed to be] dislodged from its setting and performed miraculous maneuvers while emitting astonishing light displays; the end of World War I; the name of the pope who would be reigning at the beginning of World War II; the extraordinary heavenly phenomenon that would be witnessed worldwide foretelling of the beginning of World War II; the ascendance of Russia (a weak and insignificant nation in 1917) to an evil monolithic power that would afflict the world with suffering and death.”[i]
But something about the Third and Final Secret was different, a phenomenon evidently to be avoided and obfuscated at all costs by the hierarchy of Rome. At a minimum, it spoke of the apostatizing of the clergy and dogma that followed Vatican II. And yet perhaps these were simply devices to lead to something more sinister, elements so dark that it was keeping Lucy awake at night. When she finally had written down the Secret in 1944 under obedience to Rome, she had a hard time doing so because of its terrifying contents. It had taken a fresh visit from the “Holy Mother” herself to convince Lucy it was okay. Then in the years following, she had been ordered by the Vatican to remain silent concerning its disclosure. Visits to her for hours at a time were made by Cardinal Bertone under orders from the pope during which the two of them would go over the diminutive aspects of the vision in private. This happened in 2000, again in 2001, and again in 2003. When at age ninety-seven the Carmelite nun finally passed away (2005), taking whatever secrets remained with her to the grave, her behavior at the last seemed odd to Catholics who understood Roman doctrinal “salvation” implications. Antonio Socci comments on this, pointing out how the long visits with the aged seer were not videotaped or recorded for posterity because viewers would have seen for themselves the psychological pressure that was being exerted on the cloistered Sister. “These thoughts came back to my mind while I was reading a passage of Bertone’s book, in which the Cardinal remembers that at one point the seer was ‘irritated’, and she told him ‘I’m not going to confession!’” About this, Socci wonders, “What kind of question could Sister Lucy answer to so strongly? Maybe someone was reminding the old Sister of the ecclesiastical power, and hinting that she would ‘not get absolution’? We don’t know, because the prelate [Bertone]—who knows and remembers the Sister’s (quite tough) answer very well—says he literally ‘forgot’ what his question was.” Read more Part 10
The solidarity between Pope Benedict and Cardinal Bertone goes back a long way and it certainly appears to have continued—at least for the first few years of Benedict’s papacy—in the time following the “Message of Fatima” controversy.
After being elected pope in April, 2005 and taking his place as successor of John Paul II as Sovereign of the Vatican City State and leader of the Roman Catholic Church, Ratzinger as “Pope Benedict XVI” quickly appointed Cardinal Bertone to replace Fatima co-conspirator Angelo Sodano as the Cardinal Secretary of State. On April 4, 2007, Benedict also appointed Bertone as his Camerlengo to administrate the duty of the Pope in the case of a vacancy of the papacy. Benedict has since made decisions that indicate Bertone could be (or once was) his choice for successor, and both men have at times appeared to be stacking and massaging the Red Hats in Bertone’s favor for the next (final?) conclave. This was noted in the May 13, 2011 National Catholic Reporter article, “A Triptych on Benedict’s Papacy, and Hints of What Lies Beyond,” when NCR Senior Correspondent John L. Allen Jr. spoke of the shake-up inside the Roman Curia (the Curia is the administrative apparatus of the Vatican and, together with the pope, the central governing body of the Catholic Church) in which Italian Archbishop Giovanni Angelo Becciu was appointed the Substitute for General Affairs by Pope Benedict XVI. Becciu, who replaced Archbishop Fernando Filoni for the job, seemed at first an odd selection to Vatican insiders. “Given how difficult it is to master the role [of Substitute], many observers found it curious that Filoni would be shipped out after less than four years, to be replaced by someone in Becciu who has no previous experience at all working inside the Vatican,” observed the NCR.[i] But then the nail was hit on the head when the news service added, “When the dust settles, the most obvious beneficiary of these moves would seem to be Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Secretary of State, who will not have to be concerned about the new substitute forming a rival center of power.” Read more Part 11
Cracks in the Foundation, Dark Horses Appear
Having documented what we have in the last few entries, one could think with some certainty that Cardinal Bertone is a shoo-in for Petrus Romanus. However, as we move into 2012, cracks are suddenly appearing in the foundation of his sand castle, and not everybody in the Curia—including Pope Benedict XVI, himself—may wind up as eager to support him as they once were. As Pope Benedict’s health weakens, the sharks smell blood, and claims of mismanagement have been increasing from competing factions in the Church that are more than happy to seize opportunity to cast aspersion on Bertone in order to elevate their own standing among the College of Cardinals. This may include Archbishop Vigano, whose personal letters to Pope Benedict and Cardinal Bertone concerning his reassignment as Nuncio were partially broadcast by an Italian television news program in January 2012. The letters, confirmed by the Vatican as authentic, exposed a blistering relationship between himself and Bertone involving political jockeying and financial deal making including charges of “corruption, nepotism and cronyism linked to the awarding of contracts to contractors at inflated prices.” Read more Part 12
Petrus Romanus, the Antichrist, and the Years 2012 & 2016
Contemporaneous to the arrival of the False Prophet (Petrus Romanus) is a prophecy from what is widely considered the most important work of Jewish Kabbalah, the Zohar, a collection of books written in medieval Aramaic over seven hundred years ago containing mystical commentary on the Pentateuch (five books of Moses, the Torah). In addition to interpreting Scripture, the “Vaera” section (volume 3, section 34) includes “The signs heralding Mashiach,” or “The coming of the Messiah.” The fascinating date for “his” appearance is set in the Zohar in late 2012! Given the rejection of Jesus by orthodox Jews as Messiah, Christians understand this “coming” would herald the unveiling of Antichrist in 2012. Read more Part 13
Where the Vitality of the Beast that Was, and Is Not, and Yet Is Pulsates in Anticipation of His Final “Raising”
We ended Part 13 of this series stating that, in order for the agents of the prophetic dates 2012-2016 to materialize on time, certain wizardry and alchemical machines were required to invoke the coming of the destroyers.
The three-hundred-thirty ton Obelisk in St. Peter’s Square in the Vatican City is not just any Obelisk. It was cut from a single block of red granite during the Fifth dynasty of Egypt to stand as Osiris’ erect phallus at the Temple of the Sun in ancient Heliopolis (Ἡλιούπολις, meaning city of the sun or principal seat of Atum-Ra sun-worship), the city of “On” in the Bible, dedicated to Ra, Osiris, and Isis. The Obelisk was moved from Heliopolis to the Julian Forum of Alexandria by Emperor Augustus and later from thence (approximately 37 AD) by Caligula to Rome to stand at the spine of the Circus. There, under Nero, its excited presence maintained a counter-vigil over countless brutal Christian executions, including the martyrdom of the apostle Peter (according to some historians). Over fifteen hundred years following that, Pope Sixtus V ordered hundreds of workmen under celebrated engineer-architects Giovanni and Domenico Fontana (who also erected three other ancient obelisks in the old Roman city including one dedicated to Osiris by Rameses III—at the Piazza del Popolo, Piazza di S. Maria Maggiore, and Piazza di S. Giovanni in Laterano) to move the phallic pillar to the center of St. Peter’s Square in Rome. This proved a daunting task, which took over four months, nine hundred laborers, one hundred forty horses, and seventy winches. Though worshipped at its present location ever since by countless admirers, the proximity of the Obelisk to the old Basilica was formerly “resented as something of a provocation, almost as a slight to the Christian religion. It had stood there like a false idol, as it were vaingloriously, on what was believed to be the center of the accursed circus where the early Christians and St. Peter had been put to death. Its sides, then as now, were graven with dedications to [the worst of ruthless pagans] Augustus and Tiberius.”
The fact that many traditional Catholics as well as Protestants perceived such idols of stone to be not only objects of heathen adoration but the worship of demons (see Acts 7:41–42; Psalms 96:5; and 1 Corinthians 10:20) makes what motivated Pope Sixtus to erect the phallus of Osiris in the heart of St. Peter’s Square, located in Vatican City and bordering St. Peter’s Basilica, very curious. To ancient Christians, the image of a cross and symbol of Jesus sitting atop (or emitting from) the head of a demonic god’s erect manhood would have been at a minimum a very serious blasphemy. Yet Sixtus was not content with simply restoring and using such ancient pagan relics (which were believed in those days to actually house the pagan spirit they represented) but even destroyed Christian artifacts in the process. Michael W. Cole, Associate Professor in the Department of the History of Art at the University of Pennsylvania, and Professor Rebecca E. Zorach, Associate Professor of Art History at the University of Chicago, raise critical questions about this in their scholarly book The Idol in the Age of Art when they state:
Whereas Gregory, to follow the chroniclers, had ritually dismembered the city’s imagines daemonem [demonic images], Sixtus fixed what was in disrepair, added missing parts, and made the “idols” into prominent urban features. Two of the four obelisks had to be reconstructed from found or excavated pieces… The pope was even content to destroy Christian antiquities in the process: as Jennifer Montagu has pointed out, the bronze for the statues of Peter and Paul came from the medieval doors of S. Agnese, from the Scala Santa at the Lateran, and from a ciborium at St. Peter’s.
[Sixtus] must have realized that, especially in their work on the two [broken obelisks], they were not merely repairing injured objects, but also restoring a type… In his classic book The Gothic Idol, Michael Camille showed literally dozens of medieval images in which the freestanding figure atop a column betokened the pagan idol. The sheer quantity of Camille’s examples makes it clear that the device, and what it stood for, would have been immediately recognizable to medieval viewers, and there is no reason to assume that, by Sixtus’s time, this had ceased to be true. Read more Part 14
Part 15 narrates and discusses the occultic involvement, beliefs, writings, and practices of George Washington, Founding Father and First President of the USA, and of Benjamin Franklin, the only statesman who actually signed all the documents relating to the establishment of the USA. The author touches themes such as the “apotheosis of the President” (turning the President into a god) and the role of the cabalistic number 72, the design of the dome in the capitol, with the magic square in it, etc. The overall impression that one carries is that the USA was founded on a basis of the occult, and that many, perhaps all of the US Presidents were tainted with the occult. There are startling “facts” about George Bush and the Iraq wars. Read more Part 15
Part 16 is titled “From Seventy-Two Demons to Feathered Serpents: What You Do – and Do Not – Learn in School about American History”. In public school, children are taught how a world map was created in 1507 by German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller. On this map, the lands of the Western Hemisphere are first called “America,” named so after an Italian explorer and navigator named Amerigo Vespucci. According to the official account, the United States of America received the latter part of its name when Waldseemüller used the feminized Latin version of Amerigo to call this land America.
Or, at least that’s what we are told.
What kiddies in public education are not taught, however (and which mainstream academia has yet been willing to accept), is a rival explanation for the origin of “America” related to Mesoamerican serpent-worship, biblical giants, Freemasonry, and even the year 2012. Read more Part 16
Part 17 goes out on a limb, and I think exceeds the bounds of the Prophecy of the Popes. The author seems to argue that the President of the United States might well turn out to be one suited to advance the events prophecied … specially because he has had a messianic aura, and is buoyed up by media adulation. It is not for me to evaluate how accurate the author’s prognostications are. Read more: Part 17
Because the main site concerns an event prophecied for 2012, I have decided to yield to urgency, and start summarizing also from the last Part and back through Part 16, 15, and so forth. Some time down the next few days, the two sets will meet, and you will then be able to follow the argument and evaluate its cogency for yourself.
When complete, the summaries will enable you (those who come in late!) to grasp the overall picture before wading into the massive site. After reading the summary of a given Part, you may want to look more closely at that Part, and you can then click on the link following that summary.
Of course, this summary isn’t really necessary if you do intend to read the whole site. Just click on Part 1 above, and go on from there within the site itself.