Look to the left. Martacus I. Genuflect, darn you!
Either that or I'd go with Peter II, just because of the sheer amount of chutzpah (they used to call it "gall" in the old days, I understand) needed to do something like that.
Dionysius was a not uncommon name in late antiquity. There is a Dionysius the Areopagite mentioned in Acts 17, traditionally the first bishop of Athens. When the later Dionysius was bishop of Rome, in the third century, there was another Dionysius who was bishop of Alexandria (Dionysius the Great), and they had an argument about the Trinity.
People always "hear" ancient names through the associations they have acquired since. They didn't necessarily mean the same thing in those days. After all, there was a prominent bishop in the fourth century called Lucifer of Cagliari.
There is no "rule" for Papal names, except that it is usual for a Pope to take a name that has already been used, I suppose to symbolise the fact that he is simply one in a long line and that he speaks for the Church and the Papacy, not for himself. John Paul I, the late Pope's immediate predecessor, was the first Pope for many centuries to use a new name, but even that was only made by combining two names - John and Paul - that had been used many times already. It's just a tradition.
DE GORIA OLIVAE
"For the Glory of the Olive (Tree)"
"Yes look at it all, I tell you this: not one stone will be left upon another; all will be thrown down." The prohpecy realting to chirst on the mount of olives The name matters less then what he dose during hes time as pope.
Most likely he will be called John Paul III.
EDIT: I Also remember that Prophocey fortells of a time of unprecedented earthquakes. scarey when you think of it
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.