Posted on 12/06/2006 4:29:58 PM PST by HAL9000
Excerpt -
ROME (AP) - 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 A.D. 390, has been the subject of an extended excavation that began in 2002 and was completed last month, the project's head said this week.
~ snip ~
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
Oh, it was given serious consideration by the Gnostics, all right. It wasn't accepted in the "surviving history" of the Church. "The surviving history of the Church which was handed down to us" is, in fact, the definition of Tradition.
So, In that sense, we're in agreement, are we not?
So take the question back a step. When the Church used a book, was it recognizing something that would have been true of the book in any case, or was it giving the book something? Could the Church have used Thomas liturgically, and if it had would Thomas be Canon?
Let me try to understand your question correctly: are you asking whether something, anything, could become canonical simply by being used in the Liturgy? No. If that were so, the Liturgy would be considered 100% Scripture, which it is not.
One does look at Liturgy, though, to see what the Church believes from of old. Since the Church (not individual religious enthusiasts, nitwits, and sinners, but the Church as a whole) is protected from error ("...and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it")(1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion"), what you're looking for is internal consistency, across continents, cultures, and centuries.
In the words of an ecclesiastical writer in Southern Gaul in the fifth century, St. Vincent of Lerins, here's a practical rule for distinguishing heresy from true doctrine: "quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est." What has been believed everyone, always, and by everyone.
How do you detemine that? In your words, "the surviving history." Tradition.
The Church does not teach that Saints are 'divine', simply that they served the Lord in a special way, and are worthy to be emulated. They are venerated, not worshipped, precisely because they lead others to Jesus. Some people like to see physical manifestations of those they admire. They may believe that they can pray in a more special way in those places. This is not idolatry. They are not praying TO the Saint as much as praying THROUGH the Saint; after all, that Saint is a lot closer to Jesus right now than we are.
Wouldn't she be all black and shiny? ;o)
Let the dead bury the dead.
Oh St Paul is alive alright, merely absent from the body.
Still we should venerate his living epistles not his dead bones.
Phillipians 1:21 "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."
These gorgeous churches were built so that people could look upon their creation as a form of veneration of the Lord. In such beautiful places, our souls and spirits are lifted from the mundane existence of everyday life to that glorious place we look forward to being after our lives here have ended.
AS I said before, far be it from me to assign any limits to God's generosity, or to assume that He cannot do what He means to do.
...which is why Christ mainly focused on the WORD.......material things pass, but the message goes on for eternity. I have no desire to see Paul's exhumed remains. None.
Imagine when they were built. They must have been the most awe inspiring structures in the world.
They were, although the gothic French cathedrals are even more spectacular.
Yes, and they still are! That's why it's so distressing to go into some modern Churches, which are totally bereft of beauty, and which can only be described as prayer barns!
Not really. By all appearances even the Gnostics knew the difference between Thomas and, say, John. It's just modern academics who don't. The only ones who ever disputed the place of the four Gospels were Marcionites, and they took away, not added.
It wasn't accepted in the "surviving history" of the Church. "The surviving history of the Church which was handed down to us" is, in fact, the definition of Tradition.
Please read more carefully. That phrase has nothing to do with "Tradition". It has to do with history in the ordinary sense, i.e., the same way we know about Caesar conquering Gaul.
Let me try to understand your question correctly: are you asking whether something, anything, could become canonical simply by being used in the Liturgy?
No. It's the same question I asked you already: do texts start as Canonical? Asking the same question from the other direction, was John a part of the Canon as soon as it was put down on papyrus, or did it need to be added later?
In the words of an ecclesiastical writer in Southern Gaul in the fifth century, St. Vincent of Lerins, here's a practical rule for distinguishing heresy from true doctrine: "quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est." What has been believed everyone, always, and by everyone. How do you detemine that? In your words, "the surviving history." Tradition.
I've heard of that before, and I've always been mystified why anyone would take it seriously. If that's how you define orthodoxy, then by the surviving history (in the sense I intended that phrase in the first place) there's no orthodoxy at all.
I've seen some in those metal warehouse buildings. Prayer barn fits the way they look.
Good point.
One can need a Savior without ever commiting an actual sin, or receiving original sin. One can need a Savior in order to prevent one from receiving original sin.
-A8
-A8
(Sigh.) OK, and I have an ovary of Abraham Lincoln. Obvious hoax, and with no ecclesiastical approval, I double-dog-guarantee it.
(Sigh.) OK, and I have an ovary of Abraham Lincoln. Obvious hoax, and with no ecclesiastical approval, I double-dog-guarantee it.
Got that right. "We no longer knew whether we were in heaven or on earth," reported the emissaries of Vladimir, "and such beauty, we know not how to tell of it."
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.