Saint Malachy’s Prophecy of the Popes: “Petrus Romanus” and the 2025 Conclave

I must say that Conclave 2025 is the conclave that I’ve been waiting for my whole life — it sounds like I’m exaggerating but I’m not – because I’ve been waiting for it since I was a small child. And that’s because of The Prophecy of the Popes (In Latin, “Prophetia Sancti Malachiæ Archiepiscopi, de Summis Pontificibus” or “Prophecy of Saint-Archbishop Malachy, concerning the Supreme Pontiffs”), which is said to lead to the End of the World, or at least to a time of Great Tribulation and of the purification of this generation.

It was my sister who told me about the prophecy even though she was also a child at the time. During one Holy Week, there was a special feature about the Prophecy of the Popes of Saint Malachy. That’s when she explained it again to me, and it’s stayed in my mind ever since.

On Pope John Paul II

I recall some of my personal details around the time when Pope John Paul II died. I graduated from high school on March 31, 2005, just a couple days before it happened. Our family had lunch at a nice restaurant with our relatives because my cousin I grew up with — who had been my classmate since Grade 1 — graduated with me.

The next day, April 1, I remember feeling excited about my new life as an incoming college student in University of Santo Tomas at Faculty of Arts and Letters. My family gave me graduation gifts, and one of them was The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap for my Game Boy Advance SP. I played it all night with my family around, and we said we’d go back again to the same restaurant tomorrow for another round of celebration for us only.

On April 2, just before we left for the restaurant, we heard the news: Pope John Paul II had died. He was the only Pope I had ever known. I was 16 years old, and I clearly remember the sadness I felt.

When I was six, my parents took me and my sister to World Youth Day in Manila, from January 10 to 15, 1995. I feel so blessed to have been there when Pope John Paul II visited the Philippines. It was the first time World Youth Day was held in Asia.

As I reflected on the sadness of Catholics regarding the death of Pope John Paul II, one of the first thoughts that came to my mind was: “There would only be two popes left” as foretold by the Prophecy of Saint Malachy.

On Pope Benedict XVI

On April 19, 2005, my family and I were watching live on EWTN — and at the same time, I was playing The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap on my Game Boy Advance SP for the second time — when white smoke emerged from the chimney of the Sistine Chapel. Pope Benedict XVI had been elected.

At the time, I didn’t appreciate him yet. But a few years later, when I was about to finish college, I started reading his works — and I saw how excellent they were. I also watched the full coverage of World Youth Day 2008 in Sydney, Australia, on EWTN, and it left a lasting impression on me. Seeing him there made me admire him even more. I realized that Pope Benedict XVI was the Pope for someone like me.

In 2012, he became one of the reasons I started attending the Traditional Latin Mass, although I still attend Novus Ordo depending on the schedule.

I was back home by the time Pope Francis was elected on March 13, 2013. I remember it was past midnight, and I was trying to stay awake in case the results came in. I was watching either EWTN or CNN — and I think I even woke my family up when I saw it: white smoke rising from the chimney of the Sistine Chapel.

But just a few days after Pope Francis was elected, I was hospitalized again. Those days of hospitalization became a turning point in my life.

Thank God and the Blessed Virgin Mary under her title Our Lady of Guadalupe — in December 2023 —  by a miracle — I’m healed now.

On Pope Francis

When Pope Francis was elected in 2013, I asked myself, “Wait, isn’t he supposed to be Peter the Roman?” That’s what the Prophecy of Saint Malachy said — that the last pope on the list would be Peter the Roman, who would shepherd the Church during a time of great tribulation, followed by the supposed destruction of Rome.

If Francis was the final pope, then why is there a new conclave now in 2025 — beginning May 7, 2025 when cardinals gather to elect another successor?

This raises a question, at least to those who acknowledge the Prophecy: Has the prophecy already ended? Or is there something we misunderstood?

Over the years, I’ve prayerfully considered several possibilities. And today, as the world watches the historic conclave unfold in the Vatican, I believe we are faced with six major interpretations — each one with deep implications for our faith and our time.

1. Pope Francis Was Peter the Roman — And His Death Marks the End of the List

If Saint Malachy’s prophecy is to be interpreted literally, Pope Francis was the 112th and final pope in the list. The Latin text concludes with a description of the last pontiff:

In p[er]ſecutione extrema S.R.E., ſedebit Petrus Romanus, qui paſcet oues in multis tribulationibus; quibus tranſactis, ciuitas ſepticollis diruetur, & Iudex Tremendus iudicabit populum Suum. Finis.

In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations; and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the Dreadful Judge will judge His people. The End.

Many interpret this as a reference to Rome and the End Times. Some believe that Francis fits this description. He was “Peter” in the sense that all popes are successors of Saint Peter, and “Roman” not because of nationality, as he was Argentinian, but because he held the Roman See. His Italian heritage (his father emigrated from Italy) reinforces the symbolism. If so, the current conclave may be occurring after the close of the prophecy, in which case, the new pope would not count, or worse, may represent a false successor.

This interpretation finds support in current Church conditions: doctrinal confusion, repeated scandals, division between Traditional and progressive factions, collapse in vocations, and growing hostility from secular institutions. Many Catholics feel the Church is undergoing spiritual chastisement, which could align with Saint Malachy’s vision.

2. Pope Francis Doesn’t Count — Because Pope Benedict’s Resignation Was Invalid

Another widely debated theory holds that Pope Benedict’s resignation in 2013 was canonically invalid — which, if true, would mean Pope Francis was never truly elected and therefore not counted in the prophecy at all. According to Canon 332 §2 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, a papal resignation is only valid if the pope renounces the munus, which is the spiritual and juridical office of the papacy. In his resignation statement, however, Benedict used the word ministerium, meaning “ministry” or “service” — rather than munus. This distinction, while overlooked by many, has become a flashpoint for theologians and canonists who argue it could bear significant legal and ecclesial implications.

Further complicating the matter, Benedict continued to behave in ways that many interpreted as papal. He wore the white cassock, remained inside Vatican City, adopted the title “Pope Emeritus” (a title with no firm canonical precedent), and made reference to a “shared ministry.” He continued to bless people publicly and often used papal phrasing in correspondence.

In his resignation letter, Benedict stated:

“For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant…”

It is precisely this phrase — “in such a way” — that has drawn scrutiny. In legal and theological language, especially within Canon Law, precise wording is crucial. Rather than performatively renouncing the papal office in the present tense, Benedict describes a result to take place in the future: the See “will be vacant.” Critics argue this frames the action more procedurally than juridically. In matters of ecclesial governance, juridical acts must be direct, immediate, and unequivocal. This statement, however, reads more like an announcement of intent than a definitive act.

Instead of clearly stating “I resign the munus of the Roman Pontiff,” Benedict’s use of ministerium and future-tense language introduces questions: was the resignation effective immediately, or conditioned on a future moment? Is he stepping aside from activity, or from the Office itself? Under canonical norms, only the resignation of the munus can vacate the See. Saying that it “will be vacant” does not fulfill that juridical requirement unless the proper form accompanies it.

There’s also the possibility that this ambiguity was deliberate. Pope Benedict, known for his keen theological intellect and careful use of language, may have formulated his wording to permit a resignation in appearance, while preserving a dimension of continuity in the Petrine office. His subsequent references to a “shared ministry,” his attire, and his retention of the papal name suggest, to some, that he did not view himself as having fully relinquished the role. This has prompted not only canonical speculation but also theological reflection: perhaps, as some propose, Benedict sought to safeguard the Church’s spiritual authority during an anticipated crisis or deception.

While the Church formally recognized his resignation and the 2013 conclave that elected Francis proceeded accordingly, dissenters argue that if the resignation was defective or voidable, if not outright invalid, the See of Peter was never truly vacated, and Francis’s election was canonically void, rendering him, in this view, an antipope. Additionally, if it were ever shown that Benedict was pressured or coerced by internal Vatican factions or outside forces, Canon 188 would invalidate the act altogether, as canon law requires total freedom for such a resignation. In that case, the current 2025 conclave could be either the first valid one since 2005 — or the most precarious, depending on which papal line one considers legitimate.

Personally, I haven’t taken a firm position on whether Pope Benedict’s resignation was canonically invalid. But I understand why this debate has persisted. The unusual language in his letter, paired with his continued papal symbolism afterward, has raised questions for many Catholics. For those exploring this issue further, Traditionalist sources like Chris Munier’s blog Catholics Aren’t Zombies! present thoughtful arguments that can aid discernment.

3. The Prophecy Is Symbolic — and Peter the Roman Refers to the Church Itself

Another interpretation takes the prophecy more allegorically. In this view, “Peter the Roman” does not refer to a single individual pope but to the entire papal office, especially as it endures tribulation at the end of the age.

The “tribulations” mentioned are not just persecutions, but also:

• The loss of faith among clergy and laity
• Confusion in Church teaching and discipline
• The internal war between factions within the Church
• The broader collapse of Catholic identity worldwide

The “city of seven hills” — Rome — may not be destroyed physically, but spiritually, as apostasy deepens and the voice of the Magisterium becomes faint.

4. The Prophecy Was Not Real — But I Strongly Disagree With This View

This is the position of skeptics — even some within the Church. They assert that the Prophecy of Saint Malachy is a forgery, a product of Renaissance superstition, and has been perpetuated into our time by sensational books and blogs. However, I respectfully dissent, and here is why.

Critics argue that the prophecy is a pious fraud, possibly composed by the Benedictine historian Arnold Wion, who first published it in 1595 in his work Lignum Vitæ. They suggest it was crafted to influence the papal conclave in favor of Cardinal Girolamo Simoncelli, which, they argue, explains the striking accuracy of the early mottos and the symbolic vagueness that follows.

They also emphasize that no known manuscript of the prophecy predates the late 16th century, which is significant since Saint Malachy died in 1148. This long silence in historical records has led many scholars to suspect the document was composed — or even forged — around 1590 for political purposes during a time of papal transition. Catholic apologetics outlets such as Catholic Answers, and especially Jimmy Akin, argue that the prophecy shows signs of being a postdated fabrication. Akin does not outright reject it but describes it as “not an approved private revelation” and points to the prophecy’s suspicious historical debut, the overly accurate descriptions of pre-1590 popes, and the vague or strained connections to later ones as evidence that it lacks historical merit and spiritual authority.

• Is Francis the Last Pope? – Tom Nash, Catholic Answers

• CNA Explains: What is the St. Malachy Prophecy? – Jonah McKeown, Jimmy Akin, Catholic News Agency

Despite these criticisms, it’s important to recognize that the Church has not officially condemned the prophecy. While it is not an approved private revelation, the faithful are permitted to consider such prophecies, provided they do not contradict established doctrine. The Church teaches that Private Revelations, even when not officially recognized, can inspire deeper faith and reflection, as long as they lead us closer to Christ and His Church.

Therefore, while acknowledging the scholarly debates surrounding the prophecy’s authenticity, I believe it holds spiritual significance that warrants contemplation, especially in light of recent events:

4.1. The Church Walks by Faith, Not by Scientific Proof

The Catholic Church teaches that our faith is based on divine revelation — not of scientific evidence or historical documents alone. While reason plays an important role in theology, the foundation of Catholic belief is faith in God and trust in what He has revealed through Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium.

Some modern Catholic apologists, notably Jimmy Akin, a Protestant convert, have taken a highly skeptical approach to many traditional Catholic devotions and prophecies. Though now Catholic, Akin’s reasoning often still reflects a Protestant-style demand for documented proof, which he applies even to long-beloved aspects of Catholic spirituality. For example, he has dismissed the Prophecy of Saint Malachy and cast doubt on other devotions, such as the 15 Promises of the Rosary, because there is no historical document proving the Blessed Virgin Mary gave them to Saint Dominic.

But for many Catholics, these devotions are not embraced because of notarized evidence — they are accepted because they have been passed down, lived, and loved for generations. The Church discerns their value not by modern standards of documentation, but by their fruits: do they lead souls to God? Saints and mystics throughout history have not asked for laboratory proof. They have looked instead to faith, tradition, and the transformation of hearts.

We see this with the Brown Scapular, devotion to Saint Christopher, and the visions of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich and Saint Bridget of Sweden. Even though these things might lack perfect documentation, the Church has often approved them for private devotion. Their authenticity is judged not by science, but by how they lead people to prayer, holiness, and love for Christ.

The Church does not reject reason — but it also recognizes the importance of mystery, prayer, and spiritual discernment. Not every devotion or prophecy is dogma, and Catholics are not required to believe all private revelations. But that doesn’t mean they are meaningless or fake. If something brings people closer to God and doesn’t contradict the faith, the Church allows it to be embraced as a personal devotion.

This is why, even though the Prophecy of Saint Malachy first appeared in a manuscript from the 1500s, many faithful still reflect on it seriously. Like other devotions, it wasn’t born in a vacuum. It was shared, pondered, and preserved by generations of Catholics who saw meaning in it. And for many today, that meaning still resonates.

4.2. Because Many of the Critics Are Often Not Even Catholic

Some of the loudest voices criticizing the Prophecy of Saint Malachy aren’t even Catholic. After the death of Pope Francis, many secular news sites ran articles that mocked the prophecy, and they often quoted people who don’t believe in the Catholic Church at all, including ministers from other Christian denominations like the Episcopalians, like this recent article:

The last pope? St. Malachy’s doomsday prophecy explained. – Jeanine Santucci, USA Today

But if someone doesn’t believe in the papacy, in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, in Marian apparitions, or even in the authority of the Church — how can they be trusted to explain a prophecy that’s deeply rooted in Catholic tradition?

These critics aren’t just rejecting the prophecy — they’re rejecting the entire Catholic way of seeing the world. They don’t take seriously the things that are sacred to us: the Saints, miracles, the Sacraments and their mystery. Instead, they treat our beliefs like superstitions or outdated legends.

That’s why, as a Catholic who respects the Church and its spiritual traditions, I don’t rely on those kinds of voices. The Church teaches that private revelations, like the Prophecy of Saint Malachy, must always be approached with prayer, discernment, and humility — not dismissed out of hand, and especially not by those who don’t share our faith.

4.3. Because the Last 6 Popes Fit the Prophecy Too Closely to Be Coincidence

One of the strongest reasons this prophecy continues to stir hearts is how remarkably the last several popes seem to match the descriptions — far more clearly than earlier entries on the list. Whether someone believes in the prophecy or not, it’s difficult to ignore how well these titles align with real historical facts:

• Pastor Angelicus (“Angelic Shepherd”) — Pope Pius XII, often remembered for his saintly image and doctrinal clarity.
• Pastor et Nauta (“Pastor and Sailor”) — Pope John XXIII, who was Patriarch of Venice, the famous city of waterways.
• Flos Florum (“Flower of Flowers”) — Pope Paul VI, whose papal coat of arms displayed three fleur-de-lis.
• De Medietate Lunæ (“Of the Half Moon”) — Pope John Paul I, elected on a half moon, and who reigned only 33 days.
• De Labore Solis (“From the Labor of the Sun”) — Pope John Paul II, born during a solar eclipse and buried during another.
• Gloria Olivæ (“Glory of the Olive”) — Pope Benedict XVI, whose name reflects the Benedictine order, including the Olivetan branch.

Then comes the final line — no longer a short motto like the others, but a full sentence:

“In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations. After these things, the city of seven hills shall be destroyed, and the dreadful Judge shall judge his people. The End.”

That kind of wording is different from the others. It’s not a poetic title, but a serious warning. And it’s hard not to notice how much it feels like the time we’re living in now. Even people who doubt the prophecy would have to admit: it seems like too much to be pure coincidence. Why would such precise and fitting descriptions appear now, at the very end of the list, in our era?

If it’s all just symbolic or random, why is it now — in our generation — that it all comes together so clearly? This is the question no skeptic can really answer.

4.4. “Are You Just Trying to Make It Fit?”

One of the most common criticisms of the Prophecy of Saint Malachy is that people are “just trying to make it fit.” Modern skeptics, especially apologists like Jimmy Akin and writers at Catholic Answers, argue that Catholics who believe in the prophecy are simply forcing connections. They say we’re stretching meanings, retrofitting historical details, or looking too hard for patterns that aren’t really there.

But this kind of skepticism misunderstands both how prophecy works and what it’s for.

It’s almost as if critics treat the prophecy like it’s a celebrity gossip blind item — some vague, tabloid-level clue that people irresponsibly try to match with whoever is famous at the moment. And because of that comparison, they refuse to take it seriously. They want the prophecy to sound more like a legal document than a vision from God. They expect it to give exact dates, precise names, and clear instructions — as though God should have handed Saint Malachy a list of papal names across the centuries.

But the Catholic tradition has never worked that way.

Throughout salvation history, God has spoken in mystery — not confusion, but holy mystery. Think of the Book of Revelation. Think of Daniel’s visions. Think of the dreams of Saint Joseph in the Gospels. None of these came with timestamps or unambiguous names. They came in symbols, metaphors, and phrases that only made full sense after events unfolded.

Prophecy in the Church is not designed to satisfy curiosity. It is meant to stir the soul, to wake us up, call us to prayer, and help us recognize the signs of the times.

So when critics say, “You’re just trying to make it fit,” they miss the deeper truth: it fits now because that’s when it was always meant to fit. That’s not a flaw in the prophecy. That may be the fulfillment.

4.5. The Critics Are Not Spiritually Neutral — And Some May Be Spiritually Blind

Returning to Catholic Answers and figures like Akin, one might think that their skepticism toward Catholic prophecy and devotion is not merely academic, but reflects a deeper spiritual posture. While they offer valuable apologetics in many areas, their treatment of the mystical often borders on dismissiveness. Rather than engaging these devotions, they treat them as though they must pass a historian’s audit before being spiritually credible.

This is especially evident not only in how they approach the Prophecy of Saint Malachy, but also in how they treat similar prophetic traditions, like the La Salette revelations. Both are examples of apocalyptic Catholic prophecy tied to the future of the Church and the papacy, and both have drawn suspicion from modern apologists for lacking full historical verification. In each case, the same skeptical lens is applied: if documentation is unclear, or the prophecy dramatic, it is somewhat pushed aside.

La Salette: Sorting Fact From Fiction | Catholic Answers Magazine – Jimmy Akin

In his article on La Salette, Akin borders on discrediting the La Salette prophecies by casting doubt on their authenticity, particularly targeting the version published by Mélanie Calvat in 1879. He argues that radical traditionalists misuse the line “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist” by taking it out of context and applying it to the present day without justification. He claims the later version of the prophecy includes demonstrably false predictions and was likely embellished, thus undermining its credibility. Ultimately, he presents the message as either misrepresented or irrelevant to today’s Church, dismissing its prophetic value.

Similarly, Akin applies this critical framework to other long-held devotions, such as the 15 Promises of the Rosary, questioning their origin because they rely on the private revelations of Blessed Alan de la Roche. Though he stops short of outright rejection, his default mode is one of high skepticism—what might be called naysaying, even if couched in scholarly language. He prefers what can be verified through documents and decrees, often downplaying traditions that have endured through faith, prayer, and the lived witness of generations.

Are the 15 Promises of the Rosary Reliable – Jimmy Akin

But this isn’t the path the saints took. Saints like Padre Pio, Catherine of Siena, and John Bosco did not go looking for notarized evidence before embracing what heaven revealed. They followed the fruits of grace, often amid opposition. To treat sacred tradition with suspicion simply because it lacks modern documentation is to risk missing how God often speaks through mystery, through weakness, and through voices that are misunderstood in their own time. What critics like Akin dismiss as unfounded might be a mirror to their own discomfort with divine mystery, especially in an age that prefers data to discernment.

4.6. “No One Knows the Day or the Hour” — But There Are Always Signs

Many people quote Matthew 24:36 when talking about the End Times: “But of that day and hour no one knoweth: no, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone.” And it’s true, no one should try to predict exactly when Jesus will return.

But that doesn’t mean God leaves us in total darkness.

Think about the way we experience death. We usually don’t know the exact moment it will happen, but the body often gives signs: the heart slows down, the breath changes, the senses begin to fade. These signs are part of how we prepare. In the same way, throughout history, God sometimes gives signs, not to frighten us, but to help us get ready.

That’s how the Prophecy of Saint Malachy might work. It’s not meant to tell us a date. But it might be pointing to the fact that we are getting close — that this is a time for prayer, for repentance, and for deeper faith.

Jesus Himself said in Matthew 24:33 (Douay-Rheims):

“Even so you also, when you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors.”

We don’t need a calendar. We need to be spiritually awake. If the prophecy helps us do that, then its purpose is fulfilled.

5. The Prophecy Wasn’t Meant to Predict — But to Wake Us Up

Sometimes people misunderstand what Catholic prophecy is meant to do. It’s not like astrology or fortune-telling. It’s not about predicting the future in the way we usually think, and it’s definitely not about satisfying curiosity. Prophecy in the Catholic Tradition exists to lead people back to God and to encourage repentance and spiritual readiness.

The Prophecy of Saint Malachy may contain phrases that seem to match real events, especially toward the end of the list. But even if some of the names fit surprisingly well, that doesn’t mean the prophecy was meant to serve as a calendar. In Catholic theology, prophecy is not mainly about giving us information. It’s about calling us to conversion. God allows signs and messages like these to stir hearts and wake people up, not to mark a timeline, but to make people spiritually alert.

It’s possible that Saint Malachy’s prophecy wasn’t given to help us count popes. It may have been given to remind us that we’re living in serious times, and that the Church must go through great difficulty before the Lord returns. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this clearly:

“Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.” (CCC 675)

That’s what many saints and early Church Fathers believed: That in the end, the Church would face confusion, false teachings, and a major crisis of faith. Whether Saint Malachy’s words are literal or symbolic, they seem to reflect this expectation. The prophecy isn’t meant to tell us the exact hour. It’s meant to help us stay spiritually awake.

As Saint Paul wrote in Romans 13:11 (Douay-Rheims):

“And that, knowing the season; that it is now the hour for us to rise from sleep. For now our salvation is nearer than when we believed.”

That’s the point. If this prophecy helps someone take their faith more seriously — to pray more, to repent, to trust God — then it has already done its job.

6. Why Now? Of All Centuries… Why Us?

This is a question that no critic has been able to answer. If the prophecy is just a fake from the 1500s, why does it line up so well with what we’re experiencing today? Why does it seem to describe our time so clearly?

The Church is facing major problems — moral confusion, division, scandals, and a drop in vocations. Teachings that were once clear are now debated. More and more people grow up without baptism, without the sacraments, and without belief in God. In many places, even the basics of human life like marriage, family, and gender are being redefined. Marriages are often reduced to civil contracts, entered into without the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and thus lack the grace that God intended for this sacred union.

Meanwhile, technology is advancing quickly. There are new threats from artificial intelligence, surveillance, and manipulation of human biology. Culture mocks the Gospel. And the Church itself seems to be shaken from within, not just from the outside.

If this is the case, wouldn’t it make sense that Heaven would allow some kind of warning? Something to remind people that these aren’t normal times?

Also, if the prophecy was just a coincidence, why do the clearest and most accurate phrases seem to appear near the end of the list and not in the middle or beginning? If it’s all just random, why does it suddenly become very specific right as we reach the current generation?

Even people who don’t believe in the prophecy’s origin still have to admit that it fits our time surprisingly well. That’s hard to ignore.

And if this is just a coincidence — then why are we the ones living through it?

Why This Conclave Feels So Critical

This Conclave feels more significant than any in recent memory — not just because of who might be elected, but because of the era we are now living in.

Since the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, the Church has experienced a kind of spiritual instability. Pope Francis’ papacy, while notable in many ways, has also been marked by deep controversy: doctrinal ambiguity, growing tension between traditionalists and progressives, moral scandals, and global confusion about Catholic identity. We are not in a moment of peaceful transition, rather we are in a moment where the Church itself seems wounded, uncertain, and divided.

Many faithful Catholics, including clergy, feel that something foundational has shifted. And when you combine that with a world experiencing moral collapse, technological overreach, and spiritual apathy, the moment feels more like a crossroads than a continuation.

That is why this Conclave feels like a turning point, even a test. Whoever is elected will either calm the storm or be seen as a sign that the storm is deepening. For those who see the Prophecy of Saint Malachy as relevant, it’s not hard to see how this situation mirrors the “Peter the Roman” scenario: a final pope, reigning amid tribulation, at a time when Rome trembles and the faith is tested.

In short: this doesn’t feel like a routine succession. It feels like the Church is staring into the mirror of prophecy — and must now decide whether to face what it sees, or to turn away.

This Conclave feels different, important, and critical. After the long and often polarizing papacy of Pope Francis, amid years of scandal, confusion, and spiritual disunity, it feels as though the Church stands at a real turning point. For those of us who grew up with Saint John Paul II or Benedict XVI, this moment feels even more uncertain, as if the future of the Church may pivot sharply, one way or another. Perhaps that’s why so many are reminded of the “last pope” prophecy and wonder whether Petrus Romanus is a figure of warning, or a call to deeper faith.

Conclusion

I guess then that I will just wait for the Conclave to be finished, and see who the next pope is. And after that, I will take time to pray and reflect on what I believe about the Prophecy of Saint Malachy — whether it has really come to pass, or if it’s meant to guide us in another way.

What matters most is not being certain of every detail, but being faithful to Christ, especially when times are confusing. The Church has always passed through trials, and history shows that God never abandons it.

To me, this moment matters more than most. A new pope may lead the Church for another decade or more. That’s a whole season of life — and by the time the next Conclave comes, many of us will be older, changed, or perhaps not even here anymore. This is why, to me and to my family, this Conclave is not just news. It is something we feel deeply — because the choice of a pope shapes how we will live, pray, and hope in the years ahead.

So we entrust it all to God’s mercy. We place this Conclave under the care of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of the Church, and ask for the protection of Saint Joseph, the silent guardian of the Body of Christ. We remember Saint Catherine of Siena who, in a time of deep division when two men claimed to be pope, boldly called the Church to unity and truth, and we pray for her intercession now.

And something else weighs on my heart. There are two papabili today who bear the name “Peter”: Cardinal Pietro Parolin, who is widely expected to win, and Cardinal Péter Erdő, also considered a frontrunner. If either of them is chosen, then we must consider seriously whether this is the moment Saint Malachy foresaw — when the final pope would be Petrus Romanus, “Peter the Roman.”

This is not vague poetry. It is a chilling image of the Last Judgment, of fire at the gates of Rome, and of the End of the Age. And if this comes to pass, then it will not be mere coincidence, as the naysayers always say. It will be prophecy fulfilled — in full.

If not — if someone else is elected — then we will watch, and wait, and discern what it means. Because either way, something significant is unfolding.

And if the prophecy is true… then is the End of the World near?

So I wait.

And you, dear Reader — we both wait.

Saint Catherine of Siena, pray for us!

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us!

Saint Paul the Apostle, pray for us!

Saint Peter the Apostle, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, pray for us!

Mama Mary, pray for us!

Amen.

Suggested Readings:

 The Great Catholic Monarch and Angelic Pontiff Prophecies: (??) St. Malachy (1094-1148)

 Prophecy of the Popes – Wikipedia

• Author
• Recent Posts

Mary Kris I. Figueroa

She is the Author of The Best Catholic website. As an experienced Digital Artist and Graphic Designer, she is passionate about creating and appreciating art, having focused on these fields these last few years. She also owns a couple of small businesses.

She graduated cum laude from the University of Santo Tomas, the country's Pontifical and Catholic university, with an AB in Legal Management and minor units in Theology.

As an unmarried woman, prayer holds a central place in her daily life, with a focus on the Rosary and the Divine Office. Embodying her faith, she emphasizes the growth of her inner spiritual life, guided by the wisdom of Carmelite spirituality.

God manifested to her in a unique and radical manner, which made her know Who He truly is and led her to total surrender of her life to Him.

She has studied the Bible with her family, developing a particular fondness for the Old Testament.

Her adorable and intelligent toy poodle is a delightful companion in her daily life, bringing warmth and joy to her home.

Her hobbies include reading about everything, learning Japanese and German, listening to music and playing the flute.

In her leisure time, she enjoys gaming on PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch OLED, Nintendo 3DS, iOS and OS, and collecting things related to PlayStation and Nintendo.

Email: [email protected]

Like 'The Best Catholic' on Facebook: www.facebook.com/TheBestCatholic

Latest posts by Mary Kris I. Figueroa (see all)

• My Reflection on the Final Apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe to Saint Juan Diego - December 11, 2025
• Why the Rosary is the “Weapon”: My Reflection on Our Lady of the Rosary and the Battle of Lepanto - October 7, 2025
• Mustard Seed Faith: The Unprofitable Servant - October 5, 2025