Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Papacy - Where Peter is, There is the Church
Catholic Legate ^ | September 23, 2004 | Father M. Piotrowski

Posted on 01/20/2005 6:44:04 AM PST by NYer

"Where Peter is, there is the church … he who is not with the Pope is not with God, and who desires to be with God must be with the Pope."

These words, reflecting on the meaning of the visions in Fatima, were uttered by Sister Lucia, the only surviving witness to the apparitions there. Our Lady of Fatima summons us to convert to a living and authentic faith in the only God of the Trinity, who is truly present in the Eucharist. The Mother of God reminds us that the Pope plays a decisive role in the transmission of the fullness of the faith. The Pope, as the successor to Saint Peter, is the rock on which Christ builds his church (Mt. 16:18). It is to Saint Peter that our Lord Jesus granted full authority to infallibly teach the truths of the faith and to lead and govern the entire church. Saint Peter was the first to establish the bishop’s capital in Rome, and to consecrate it with his own blood, the blood of a martyr. For this reason each successor to Saint Peter in the Capital acquires primacy over the whole Church.

Saint Peter resided in Rome and suffered a martyr’s death there in the year 67 A.D., at the time of the Christian persecutions during the reign of the emperor Nero. The exact place of his martyrdom is unknown. Historians believe Saint Peter was crucified upside down in Nero’s amphitheater, which was situated where the Vatican now stands. He was buried at a nearby cemetery. Many years of excavations underneath the Basilica of Saint Peter led to the discovery of the first Pope’s tomb. The tomb lies directly beneath the Pope’s altar in the Vatican Basilica. This tomb signifies that each bishop of Rome is Saint Peter’s successor and by virtue of his office as "the successor of Christ and the Pastor of the whole Church has full, supreme and universal power over the church" (Christus Dominus 2:9).

For thirteen centuries no one questioned the presence of Saint Peter’s tomb in the Vatican. The first to dispute this were the adherents of the Waldensian heresy, who rejected the primacy of the Pope, maintaining that Saint Peter was never in Rome, let alone that his tomb was there. Likewise, Luther and other leaders of the Reformation denied the existence of Saint Peter’s tomb in the Vatican, at the same time calling into question the primacy and infallibility of the Pope in matters of faith.

Excavation work beneath St Peter’s Basilica began in the spring of 1939 following the death of Pius XI, who had expressed the wish to be buried in the Vatican Grottos. During the digging of his grave, the remains of a pagan necropolis from Roman times were discovered. Hearing of this discovery, Pope Pius XII commissioned a team of research workers to begin excavations and investigations, which after several years lead to sensational discoveries. During the 10 years of archaeological work part of a large cemetery was discovered. Its greatest period of development would have taken place between the 2nd and the beginning of the 4th centuries A.D. Sepulchres were discovered along a street, which ran in the vicinity of Nero’s amphitheater. That superbly preserved necropolis is a typical pagan cemetery, and in it are also found Christian graves. To this day one can admire tombs and monuments of unparalleled architectural beauty, which belonged to affluent Roman families.

In the Valerius’ vault a Latin inscription was found: Petrus rogat Iesus Christus pro sanctis hominibus chrestianis ad corpus suum sepultis (Peter prays to Jesus Christ for the Christians buried near his body). In Popilius Herakles’ tomb the following inscription was found; IN VATIC. AD CIRCUM (at the Vatican, near the amphitheater), which confirms the cemetery’s location on the Vatican hills in the vicinity of Nero’s amphitheater. In the main, however, these were sepulchres of families professing a pagan religion.

At the beginning of the 4th century the cemetery was in full use. According to Roman law the tombs were sacred and inviolable. The only reason the emperor Constantine (280 – 337) was required to break the Roman cemetery law in the case of this necropolis was the necessity of building a Christian basilica on the terrain owing to the great devotion Christians had to the tomb of St. Peter, which was located there. The emperor ordered a so-called congestion terrarum, demolishing the northern end of the cemetery and covering tombs which were found in its southern part with earth. The aim was to obtain a wide flat area on the slope of the Vatican hill at the same level as the tomb of Saint Peter, and to begin the construction of the basilica there in reverence to the first Pope. It bears witness to the tremendous veneration in which the first Christians held the tomb of Saint Peter.


Cross section of necropolis below the Bernini altar

The excavations carried out in the central area of the basilica, under the pope’s altar, lead to the sensational discovery of the tomb and relics of St. Peter. First to be discovered was a huge cuboidal marble reliquary almost 3 yards wide. It had been built by the emperor Constantine in the years 321 – 324. A small tombstone, in the shape of a hollowed-out chapel, was found inside the reliquary and was supported by two columns and set in a red-plastered wall. Since this tiny memorial had been enclosed in the reliquary it must have been of extraordinary significance. The research workers had come upon the most important section of the Vatican Basilica and the entire underground necropolis. It became evident that this was the first monument to be erected, in the 2nd century, on St Peter’s tomb. The first Christians considered the tomb of St. Peter a victorious trophy. Since the earliest information concerning the ‘trophy-tomb’ of St. Peter comes from the Roman priest Gaius, this tombstone was called Gaius’ Trophy. Early in the 2nd century the Roman Christian community built the ‘trophy-tomb’ on the unexpectedly modest grave of St Peter, which had quite simply been dug in the ground. On its western side a red plastered wall enclosed it. This wall surrounded a small burial ground about 8 x 4 yards. Many common and simple graves were found there, placed around St. Peter’s grave, on top of which sat Gaius’ Trophy. The tomb of the Apostle Peter was particularly highly venerated, to which the many inscriptions on the so called ‘g – wall’ bear witness, including a large inscription in Greek: "Peter is here at the ‘red wall’."


Red Wall

The research undertaken over many years by Professor Margherita Guarducci led to the discovery of the meanings of the many inscriptions on the ‘g – wall’. They were written by the one person responsible for that place, according to established principles of mystical cryptography, and were both spiritually as well as logically ordered. As an example, we know that the letters u - á mean a transition from the end, that is from death to the beginning, to the fullness of life.

Aside from the names of the dead the name of St. Peter appears, linked with the names of Christ and Mary, as well as the profession of belief in the Blessed Trinity; that Jesus Christ is true God and true man; that he is the second person in the Blessed Trinity, the Son of God, the Beginning and the End, the Life, the Light, the Resurrection, Salvation, Peace and Victory etc. In this manner Christians professed their faith in the Blessed Trinity, Christ’s Divinity, the intercession of Mary and eternal life and prayed for their dead.

This is extremely important testimony indicative of the fact that since the very beginnings of Christianity there was a very deep faith in the Blessed Trinity, Christ’s divinity, the intercession of the Mother of God and eternal life, as well as the primacy of St. Peter.

It is also worthwhile to mention at this point the inscription hoc vince (with this you shall conquer) near Christ’s monogram. It is the Latin translation of a famous Greek inscription ôdoôu íéeáM, which the emperor Constantine saw in the sky, together with a cross, before his victory in the Battle of Milvian Bridge against Maxentius’s armies on October 28 in the year 312.

Archaeologists were very surprised when they failed to find the relics of St. Peter in the grave dug in the ground. They were later found just over 2 yards above the original grave in a recess in the ‘g-wall’. The recess containing the relics was discovered on October 13, 1941. It transpired that the emperor Constantine had transferred the relics of St. Peter from the original grave to the specially prepared recess in the ‘g - wall’ during the construction of the marble reliquary.

The relics became the subject of anthropological studies of many years duration. Initially the studies were headed by Professor Galeazzi Lisi, then by Professor Correnti. The results of the studies were printed in 1965 in a book published by the Vatican: Le reliquie di Pietro sotto la Confessione della Basilica Vaticana.. The bones of St. Peter, placed at the time of the emperor Constantine in the ‘g-wall’ recess, were wrapped in a valuable purple cloth interwoven with pure gold.

The anthropological studies revealed that the bones belonged to one person, a male of stocky build, aged between 60 – 70 years and 5 feet 5 inches tall.

The scientific confirmation of the authenticity of the relics of St. Peter was an extremely important event. During the general audience on June 26, 1968 Pope Paul VI officially announced the discovery of the relics of St Peter. The following day, during the course of formal celebrations, 19 receptacles holding the relics of the first Pope were laid to rest in the recess of the ‘g-wall,’ where they remain to this day.

Father M. Piotrowski, Society of Christ
September 23, 2004


TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Ecumenism; General Discusssion; History; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241-243 next last
To: sartorius

Yes I looked and hes OUTTA HERE!!!!!!!!


61 posted on 01/20/2005 5:13:16 PM PST by CouncilofTrent (Quo Primum...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: mhuye

Sure noob.


62 posted on 01/20/2005 6:28:09 PM PST by CouncilofTrent (Quo Primum...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #63 Removed by Moderator

To: sartorius

***Yes.... Nice discussion on Saint Peter's going on here. The antagonist has been...ahem...dealt with by "ZOT" thanks to a Higher Power through the intervention of the Religious Admin. ***

Am I too late to pile on with the words of St. Paul?

"Be ye followers of ME as I am of CHRIST".

When Peter came to Antioch he was to blame for the desention when he ate with the saved Gentiles, till certain men came from James at Jerusalem and he separated himself and the jewish believers from the gentiles. Paul gave the "first POPE" a royal chewing out for his actions.


64 posted on 01/20/2005 8:20:51 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn, the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: sartorius

:) Great picture! Thanks for posting it, santorius!


65 posted on 01/21/2005 4:20:57 AM PST by Convert from ECUSA (tired of shucking and jiving)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: CouncilofTrent; murphE; NYer; netmilsmom

Champagne for everyone!!!!!!!!


66 posted on 01/21/2005 4:26:10 AM PST by Convert from ECUSA (tired of shucking and jiving)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE

So, in the original Greek text when St. Paul always calls Peter "Kephas," which is a Greek trasnliteration of the Aramaic word "kepha" - which just means "rock" and not "little stone or anything of the sort - it was completely arbitrary?


67 posted on 01/21/2005 5:36:00 AM PST by mike182d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
"Be ye followers of ME as I am of CHRIST".

This is exactly the point: we are to be followers of Christ, but who is the Christ that we follow? Which one of us was actually a witness to the real person of Jesus as he was alive on earth? Who here is able to verify the testimony in the Gospels with their own personal accounts of Jesus walking on water, healing paralytics, raising from the dead, et cetera. Everything we know of Christ comes from the Church because the Apostolic Tradition that has existed for over 2000 years began with those who had first-hand accounts of Jesus and had the authority to comment on the experience of Him. Therefore, it would logically follow that to properly follow Jesus we would have to know who He truly is and in order to know who Christ truly is, we need Apostolic Tradition. Otherwise, there's absolutely no reason to believe in the four Gospels in the N.T. over the gospel or believe in a Trinity over Arianism. Belief in Christ and belief in the Authority of the Church are the same thing.
68 posted on 01/21/2005 5:41:23 AM PST by mike182d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

sorry, its early in the morning. The last sentence should read "...over the gospel of Thomas."


69 posted on 01/21/2005 5:43:05 AM PST by mike182d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Convert from ECUSA; NYer; netmilsmom; CouncilofTrent; ArrogantBustard
"And why do we never see Catholics with persecution complexes ministering at all?"

I was pondering this question that the recently departed asked. I for one do not see the point in witnessing in words to those who are not seeking. It's not as if they would be receptive. If I am able to, I gladly respond to someone with sincere questions though. I also notice that Catholics here do not invade Protestant threads in the same manner, or frequency, in which they invade our threads.

If we did, just think of the field day we could have with this one:

If a Person Rejects Christ Before the Rapture, Can He Be Saved After the Rapture?

So many problems here, one hardly knows where to begin.

70 posted on 01/21/2005 7:00:08 AM PST by murphE ("I ain't no physicist, but I know what matters." - Popeye)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: murphE

I only once or twice went on a protestant thread to defend a historical fact (St. Batholomew's Day Massacre in particular) which the Calvinists were ignoring. I got myself waist high in crap that day..... You cant talk real history with many Protestants.


71 posted on 01/21/2005 7:31:08 AM PST by CouncilofTrent (Quo Primum...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: murphE

>>I also notice that Catholics here do not invade Protestant threads in the same manner, or frequency, in which they invade our threads.<<

Amen my FRiend!!!

From this moment forward, I volunteer to be the official Anti-Catholic Troll Hunter.

Please ping me if you see one.
I'll try to come up with a cool graphic for it!

I don't want to be mean to anyone, however, I polled the holders of the Catholic ping lists a while ago to see how many of us go onto the non-Catholic threads to slam them. It was concluded that we don't. Because I am on Alouette's, SJackson's and Salem's ping lists, I see that no one goes on the Jews threads to "Minister" to them.
Only us.


72 posted on 01/21/2005 7:46:04 AM PST by netmilsmom (God send you a Blessed 2005!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: sartorius

Wow!
A true hero!

Glad he's one of ours.


74 posted on 01/21/2005 8:34:00 AM PST by netmilsmom (God send you a Blessed 2005!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Am I the only Catholic who finds charges of "Catholic-bashing" and "Anti-Catholic" intensely distasteful? You don't find St. Peter calling the Romans Christian bashers. If people come in to disrupt, then let's in charity correct. And correct. And correct again. :)

Back to the content of this thread though, I read the "Bones of St. Peter" some time ago which details some of this material. It was fascinating, but the circumstances of the finding of the bones were a bit...well...I'll call it unfortunate. I believe Guarducci's analysis, but I have often wondered if any newer information has come to light?

75 posted on 01/21/2005 10:18:34 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Claud

I'm not Catholic but I find it distateful. If anyone disagrees 'people' start crying like little girls. I can't believe 'he' got booted from this thread. What a joke. You *can* ignore his posts, not that they are inflammatory, and he would probably go away.

Now I'll be called names...

BTW, my boss and I manage to have discussions and disagree with each other w/o calling each other names.


76 posted on 01/21/2005 10:29:08 AM PST by Jn316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Jn316

Another thing. Just the title of this thread just sits wrong with me. 'The Papacy - Where Peter is, There is the Church'

When I think Church I think Jesus, God. It just sits wrong with me to read the title. Peter is who Peter is. It's ALL about God.


77 posted on 01/21/2005 10:31:03 AM PST by Jn316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: mike182d
So, in the original Greek text when St. Paul always calls Peter "Kephas," which is a Greek trasnliteration of the Aramaic word "kepha" - which just means "rock" and not "little stone or anything of the sort - it was completely arbitrary?

Produce the Aramaic.

It makes little difference in any event. Jesus is the Rock on which His Church is built.

Food for thought:

Catholic Catechism

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

==================================================================================================

Remember, in this man Peter, the rock. He’s the one, you see, who on being questioned by the Lord about who the disciples said he was, replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On hearing this, Jesus said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you’...’You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven’ (Mt 16:15 - 19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, ‘They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ’ (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ.

"Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer

(John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).

78 posted on 01/21/2005 11:19:34 AM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
Produce the Aramaic.

Are you denying that in Galatians Paul calls Peter Cephas four times in Greek or that kepha is an aramaic word or that Jesus spoke Aramaic. I'm not sure what exactly what you're requesting...

As I am at work at the moment, I provide the following for your consideration:

"Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the identity of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy."

"The startling thing was that—aside from the single time that Abraham is called a "rock" (Hebrew: Tsur; Aramaic: Kepha) in Isaiah 51:1-2—in the Old Testament only God was called a rock. The word rock was not used as a proper name in the ancient world. If you were to turn to a companion and say, "From now on your name is Asparagus," people would wonder: Why Asparagus? What is the meaning of it? What does it signify? Indeed, why call Simon the fisherman "Rock"? Christ was not given to meaningless gestures, and neither were the Jews as a whole when it came to names. Giving a new name meant that the status of the person was changed, as when Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen.17:5), Jacob’s to Israel (Gen. 32:28), Eliakim’s to Joakim (2 Kgs. 23:34), or the names of the four Hebrew youths—Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. 1:6-7). But no Jew had ever been called "Rock." The Jews would give other names taken from nature, such as Deborah ("bee," Gen. 35:8), and Rachel ("ewe," Gen. 29:16), but never "Rock." In the New Testament James and John were nicknamed Boanerges, meaning "Sons of Thunder," by Christ, but that was never regularly used in place of their original names, and it certainly was not given as a new name. But in the case of Simon-bar-Jonah, his new name Kephas (Greek: Petros) definitely replaced the old."

In light of Isaiah 22:22, as this book of the Old Testament has sometimes been called the 5th Gospel because of its relevance to Christ and the number of times that He refers to it, are you suggesting that Jesus is handing everyone who professes Christ as Lord the authority to "rule" over the inhabitants?
79 posted on 01/21/2005 11:54:13 AM PST by mike182d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
http://www.frtommylane.com/homilies/ years_abc/dedication_basilica_john_lateran.htm

You sent me to the Default Error Page. Thanks.

80 posted on 01/21/2005 12:00:44 PM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241-243 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson