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.
1Cr 1:27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Cr 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, [yea], and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
1Cr 1:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
1Cr 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
1Cr 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
Context is your friend. :)
Boilerplate RC response anticipated in first post, but handled again in #45, above.
Oh, it's always possible to split hairs fine enough to obviate the intent of any requirement.
Romans 14:22, "Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves."
I'd submit there was more insight in your exchange, than is likely in what remains (sic) of this thread.
[chuckle]
Thanks!
G Larry wrote: Have you ever looked up the meaning of 'worship'
Ditto wrote: When you're done thumping your Bible at us heathens, add a Webster's dictionary to your reading list so you can understand the difference between the words venerate and worship.And also: English - it's a good language with lots of words. I recommend it.
What caught my attention about the original article posted mentioned the word "devotional" as applied to Paul. Now it is true, Paul wrote that we should be "devoted to one another" (Romans 12), but "devotional" piety is usually something applied to God alone.
G Larry & Ditto, have you ever looked up the etymology of "veneration?" It means "reverence" from venerari--to "worship, revere." It has its origins in the name, "Venus." While it is true that some pagan concepts and words over the centuries have been redeemed for Judeo-Christian purposes, the fact that the god of beauty, love and desire--a demi-god, if you will--is the origin of a word & practice of devotion & reverence applied to one who may be prayed to (some saints are prayed to)...the question at least has to be raised.
But none of that makes our veneration of him wrong. Every society venerates its heros. St. Peter's, which is a monument to the Apostle Peter, does not in fact call our attention to Peter as much as the Lincoln memorial does to our 16th President.
Fits perfectly, context and all.
Thanks.
1Corinthians, Ch 1 & 3.
Is somewhat funny to debate with people about Paul, when they seem to be clueless as to what he thought/said/did. It's not as if he never wrote anything.
In the epistles Paul and others cite the examples of Scripture. Scripture as recorded history was and is supported by historical artefacts. Paul's tomb is among them. Atrefacts are a "language" we preserve in order that it's meaning might not be distorted and history rewritten. Historical artefacts in this case show that God chose to intercede in history, not outside of it. He created a church that lives within history in order to give generations of men a chance to transcend it. Paul's life and his body lived in history in order to save men from history (Adam's fall) as it is built into our very natures, and as it is passed on from generation to generation.
Good grief - I am astonished at some people's willful misunderstanding of things in order to justify a little spleen.
Among other things, the objectivism of Paul and Paul's tomb stand in opposition to the gnosticism of Simon Magus, that other prominent early Christian of Rome. Unfortunately, that gnosticism is still present and must be combatted. It has its tentacles in most modern heresies and sub-flavors of Christianity that underemphasize history. History affirms that the church is LIFE and not just an abstraction.
Now now.
Don't start confusing us with the facts.
And this thread is proof they are not an endangered species.
He's objecting to factionalism and division, not veneration.
Your point being what, exactly?
The usual terms in which this is discussed formally are Greek, not Latin, and draw a distinction between dulia (the honor due to saints) and latria (the honor due only to God).
Rogator says: Wow! How amazing that you have a direct pipeline to St. Paul. (Well, actually we do. It's called the "Epistles" E-p-i-s-t-l-e-s.) Are you channeling him after a seance or something like that?
We don't have to. It's called "Reading" (R-e-a-d-i-n-g).
The passage that applies to all of this is 1 Cor. 1:13: "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?"
Paul is telling us he is not the object of devotion, veneration, reverence, future prayers. He himself told Timothy: "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5). There are not thousands of prayerful mediators.
Neee!
LOL if you say so! To me it reads:
1 Cr 1:31 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
1Cr 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
...meaning, those that are in Christ, he that is gloried, let him be gloried in the Lord, which is exactly what Catholics do when we VENERATE someone, we HONOR them for their sainthood, their PLACE in CHRIST.
But go ahead, read your verse out of context if you want.
Another incorruptible?
Gnosticism is an ever-present threat. Which is one reason why the dogma of the resurrection of the dead is under emphasized, and the immortal soul is thought of as the authentic human being and the body just a husk.
You obviously didn't read Ch1, verses 13 through 15.
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.