When I read this I was reminded of the article I had just recently read from the Catholic Encylopedia under
"Peter, the Tomb" Whats wrong with this picture?
When the Church was once more at peace under Constantine, Christians were able at last to provide themselves with edifices suitable for the celebration of Divine Service, and the places so long hallowed as the resting places of the relics of the Apostles were naturally among the first to be selected as the sites of great basilicas. The emperor himself not only supplied the funds for these buildings, in his desire to honour the memories of the two Apostles, but actually assisted in the work of building with his own hands. At St. Paul's, where the tomb had remained in its original condition of a simple vault, no difficulty presented itself, and the high altar was erected over the vault. The inscription, dating from this period, "Paulo Apostolo Martyri", may still be seen in its place under the altar.
They had no problem finding and reestablishing Paul's grave, but what do you suppose happened when they tried to move Peters bones? Something very strange, the Romans didn't want it removed because it had sentemental values reminding them of the age of persecution. What a Crock.
Only, the actual vault itself in which the body lies is no longer accessible and has not been so since the ninth century.
Read on,
At St. Peter's, however, the matter was complicated by the fact that Pope St. Anacletus, in the first century, had built an upper chamber or memoria above the vault. This upper chamber had become endeared to the Romans during the ages of persecution, and they were unwilling that it should be destroyed. In order to preserve it a singular and unique feature was given to the basilica in the raised platform of the apse and the Chapel of the Confession underneath. The extreme reverence in which the place has always been held has resulted in these arrangements remaining almost unchanged even to the present time, in spite of the rebuilding of the church. Only, the actual vault itself in which the body lies is no longer accessible and has not been so since the ninth century. There are those, however, who think that it would not be impossible to find the entrance and to reopen it once more. A unanimous request that this should be done was made to Leo XIII by the International Archaeological Congress in 1900, but, so far, without result.
ARTHUR S. BARNES
Transcribed by Judy Levandoski
Isn't this so tipical of anything that tries to put Peter in Rome, there is always a "YEH BUT"
Here's where the CathEn is outdated. Recently they did indeed uncover the tomb and sure enough there were bones in it. And there were ancient inscriptions in Latin identifying it as Peter's remains.
At St. Peter's, however, the matter was complicated by the fact that Pope St. Anacletus, in the first century, had built an upper chamber or memoria above the vault. This upper chamber had become endeared to the Romans during the ages of persecution, and they were unwilling that it should be destroyed.
This is Catholic-speak for "we know that it's not really a tomb, so we are making up a reason for not digging up the body."
That is, until we actually found a body and an inscription. But we all know that the Catholics threw any old body in there, named it "Peter" and waited 1100 years to show it off. That way they would accuse us of not having an actual tomb, then we would, after 11 centuries or so, surprise everyone.
SD