Posted on 12/06/2006 6:18:21 AM PST by NYer
Vatican archaeologists have unearthed a sarcophagus believed to contain the remains of the Apostle Paul that had been buried beneath Rome's second largest basilica. The sarcophagus, which dates back to at least 390 A.D., has been the subject of an extended excavation that began in 2002 and was completed last month, the project's head said this week.
"Our objective was to bring the remains of the tomb back to light for devotional reasons, so that it could be venerated and be visible," said Giorgio Filippi, the Vatican archaeologist who headed the project at St. Paul Outside the Walls basilica.
The interior of the sarcophagus has not yet been explored, but Filippi didn't rule out the possibility of doing so in the future.
Two ancient churches that once stood at the site of the current basilica were successively built over the spot where tradition said the saint had been buried. The second church, built by the Roman emperor Theodosius in the fourth century, left the tomb visible, first above ground and later in a crypt.
When a fire destroyed the church in 1823, the current basilica was built and the ancient crypt was filled with earth and covered by a new altar.
"We were always certain that the tomb had to be there beneath the papal altar," Filippi told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.
Filippi said that the decision to make the sarcophagus visible again was taken after many pilgrims who came to Rome during the Catholic Church's 2000 Jubilee year expressed disappointment at finding that the saint's tomb could not be visited or touched.
The findings of the project will be officially presented during a news conference at the Vatican on Monday.
Ah yes, the charge of 'arrogance'.
Always effective.
Staring at dead bodies? We are talking about memoralizing the dead and remembering that human beings are not pure spirits. We exist truly only in time and space. A man without a body is not truly man.
I don't understand why you need to dig up Paul's bones to do that.
In their defense, nearly all of the writers who have statues there are alse buried there (Shakespeare being the exception, but it would be difficult to not have his statue among English writers).
It is at times difficult for some Protestants to acknowledge that there were historical events in the Christian world between the Age of the Apostles and the start of the Reformation.
Yes, I should have stated that they marked the tombs. But the point remains, if we can honor the tombs of poets, much more should we honor those of the saints.
On the contrary. There are many events in that period that the Roman church would like to forget.
What examples do you have that involve OFFICIAL doctrines or practices of the Church?
hehe This thread has become quite the humorous parody of the "no graven images" Bible thump that dominated earlier.
I must say though, that the underlying point still seems to be missed, and it's sad: To believe that those in Heaven are not as alive as we are now, and can hear us just as well as you or I can hear another on earth is a sad belief in my opinion. I find it comforting to believe that I can pray to an actual SAINT, and he/she will HEAR me, and not only that, but pray FOR me to God.
I don't know why anyone wouldn't want to embrace such a belief. It really helps those days when you feel you just don't have a friend in the world. And yes, God is our Friend. But it's nice to have a connection, a communion, with actual people who are NOT a supreme being, who have lived the life we have before, and have persevered.
If that's idolotry, I am guilty as charged.
Good example. That which you wish to forget, categorize as "unofficial"
Okay, give any example.
(4th crusade perhaps?)
Precisely! Especially within the historical/archeological realm, finding a postage stamp-sized fragment of a Gospel from even the Second or Third centuries is a major event.
And who is talking about "waving a bag of bones"? It's a grave. If we visit the graves of our loved ones or look at their pictures are we "goofy cultists"? Because from what I've noticed, even non-believers do that.
That people have been making the same mistake for millenia doesn't mean that it isn't a mistake.
I like to remind those who say "Paul wrote..." when discussing Scripture that;
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.", 2 Timothy 3:15-17
It's quite a common mistake, even among learned theologians.
Matthew 12:36, "But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken."
What manuscripts? Where did that come from?
We could talk about Borgia but I suppose all the crap he pulled was "unofficial".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.