Pope Francis: The last pope?

Does the Prophecy of St. Malachy mean Francis is the last pope before the end of the world?

St. Malachy, tile mosaic in St Patrick's Cathedral, Armagh, NorthernIreland.

I knew this moment would come. Pope Francis has died, and people are talking about the prophecies of St. Malachy, which """predict""" that Francis will be the last pope before the end of the world.

Except…

St. Malachy almost certainly did nothing of the sort. If you just landed here from a search wondering "Will Pope Francis be the last pope?" the answer is No. If you want to know why some people insist he will be, press on.

St. Malachy

Born in 1094 or thereabouts, St. Malachy was a good and holy man who became bishop of Armagh in Ireland. Celtic Christianity was a powerful, unique, and thriving corner of the church, so successful that Irish missionaries were shipped to other lands.

Malachy's biography was written by St. Bernard of Clairvaux, who knew him and admired him greatly. Let's linger on that fact just a moment, for the uninitiated.

Bernard of Clairvaux is one of the towering figures in Church history: reformer, founder of the Cistercians, preacher extraordinaire, mystic, co-founder of the Knights Templar, and one of the greatest men of his or any age.¹ Bernard met Malachy during the latter's pilgrimage to Rome, and again during a second pilgrimage. It was during this visit that Malachy fell ill and died in Bernard's arms. One of the busiest men in Christendom admired him so much he wrote down everything he knew about Malachy's life based on their conversations, and it became his first vita (life story and works). If you were looking for an unimpeachable source, it would be Bernard.

When Malachy started attracting headlines around the time of the last conclave, it was not for his piety, however, but for something he didn't do: his "Prophecy of the Popes." Malachy allegedly had a vision of the next 112 popes to come, with one he calls "Petrus Romanus" (Peter the Roman) being the last before the Final Judgment.

That 112th pope (the 266th in Church history) is Francis.

Needless to say, a lot of people spun this story out in apocalyptic videos, posts, and books, missing that part where Jesus says “neither the day nor the hour.”

My son found this and its sequel in a thrift shop, and it’s a treasure-house of paranoid anti-catholic conspiracy theories spanning the ages.

The Prophecy

The prophecy looks like it could have some potential at first glance. Although it might have been more useful had Malachy provided the names of each pope, instead we get a little Latin motto for each that describes something about him, often a reference to his family coat of arms.

For example, pope nine in the list is described as "ex ansere custode," which means "the guardian goose." The ninth pope from Malachy was Alexander III (1159-81), whose family had a goose on its coat of arm. The eleventh description is "sus in cribro" ("Pig in a sieve"). The corresponding pope, Urban III (1185-87), is of the Crivelli family (the name means "sieve") and their coat of arms have two pigs. The twenty-first motto is "Hierusalem Campanię" (Jerusalem of Champagne). Urban IV (1261-64) was born in Champagne and Patriarch of Jerusalem.

These are all interesting correspondences, but something happens around the 1590s. The correspondences start to get less and less sharp and more and more vague. One might almost call them Nostradamus-like, in that you can read them many different ways, shaping the meaning to find whatever you want.

For example, "lilium et rosa" ("lily and rose") is the motto for pope 81, Urban VIII (1623-44). "De flumine magno," ("from the great river") is the saying attached to pope 85, Clement X (1670-76). Pius VI (1775-99), pope 96, gets "peregrin apostolic" ("apostolic pilgrim").

None of these have any correspondence with the popes they're supposed to predict. Some can be fit to match if you squint. Innocent XI (1676-89) had a lion on his arms, so "bellua insatiabilis" ("insatiable beast") is a match. Of course, many, many families had lions or other predatory beasts on their arms. It was kind of a thing.

The only reasonable conclusion, if we are to believe this was a genuine prophecy of St. Malachy, is that he had strong visions up until the 1590s, and then just kind of made up the rest. But there's a better explanation.

The prophecy was unknown to the world until it was "discovered," hidden away in some secret archive, by a monk named Arnold de Wyon.

When did this happen?

Quelle surprise! Some time around the 1590s, right about the time the accuracy of the "prophecies" plunges off a cliff.

But Why?

Thus, the most logical explanation is either than Arnold forged the document himself, or it was forged by other hands for him to find, close to the time of its discovery. The lack of any mention of prophecies in any vitae for Malachy, and the absence of textual evidence prior to the 1590s, is a forceful argument for fraud.

Until recent times, few have bothered with the prophecies, and Church historians discount them. The appearance of Francis as the 112th pope, and the irresistible temptation to monetize hysteria and gullibility, has led to minor renaissance of Malachy Mania, but all the spin in the world can't put lipstick on this pig. It's a fraud.

Why would Arnold de Wyon, or anyone else, forge such a document?

One theory has to do with the conclave of 1590, which ultimately elected Pope Gregory XIVth from among several factions. Cardinal Girolamo Simoncelli, a friend of Arnold de Wyod, was a papal hopeful. The prophecy motto for the next pope to be chosen at this time was "of the old city." Simoncelli was from Orvieto: in Latin, "Urbs vetus" ("old city"). By creating a long line of accurate prophecies from a great saint, the cardinal electors might start thinking Simoncelli was the man promised in the prophecy.

In other words, it was a conclave campaign ad.

My other site:

This Deathless Death

1. The dog breed was not named after him, but St. Bernard of Menthon, founder of a hospice for travelers in the Alps.