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.
In fact, I just finished reading through 1 Cor out loud with my family last night. I think it's safe to say I didn't "forget to read" a single verse.
It would help if you read the article before engaging in debate.
"Our objective was to bring the remains of the tomb back to light for devotional reasons, so that it could be venerated
So, you've never visited a family member's or friend's grave? You think we should be buried in unmarked graves? You believe that any photos of deceased loved ones should be destroyed and that they should never be mentioned again?
Actually, you've made my point exactly. My point is that the concept of "veneration" is precisely not a Greek one...Greek being what the New Testament was written in. "Veneration"--based upon "Venus"--is a Roman concept.
Perhaps some Roman Catholic Bibles insert the word in somewhere, but I studied the Jerusalem Bible for years (a good RC translation), and I can't recall "veneration" included in there.
Therefore, veneration is not a New Testament tradition. It's a Roman tradition rooted in paganism and synchronized into the Roman church.
Yes yes, and if one looks up older practices regarding Mary in the Church, one will find that the word "worship" is used extensively with regards to the honor paid to Mary. GASP!!!!!!!!!! CATHOLICS ADMIT THEY WORSHIP MARY!!!!!!!
Here's a clue: Look up the meanings of latria, hyperdulia and dulia, and find that they all were described as "worship" at one time, but that does NOT mean they are the same KIND of worship. You, being a student of etymology should know that in times past, words had different, and and sometimes BROADER meanings.
Honestly, to constantly answer the charge of idolotry is TIRESOME. Do you who think Catholics are idol worshippers honestly believe that we sit around and INTEND to worship a statue, like we worship God? Do you think there's some secret we Catholics know, and chuckle about at secret meetings where we sacrifice goats or something? I mean REALLY!
What is dulia then, which is the formal term for what's going on? That's Greek. That makes it okay, I suppose.
The linguistic origins of a name don't make the thing denoted by the name right or wrong. Obviously.
We have his inspired writings from Romans through Philemon and not once did he suggest that people venerate him or any of the other Apostles. Veneration was reserved only for God and God alone.
Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. (1 Corinthians 3:5-7 KJV)
Paul was simply God's reluctant servant. While we can admire him for his committment to Christ, to venerate him is, to attach some deep spiritual significance to his rotting corpse is, IMHO, to bring him to shame.
Ok, so you worship her. Do you pray to her?
Doesn't bother me that one chooses to venerate a relic.
What bothers me is that there's no way they can be certain the remains are that of Paul. If millions are stupid enough to parade by a casket of unknown remains, so be it.
It would be sad and deceitful should the Church use this to engage in ill-gotten gain.
Once more time, if you're only venerating God, you're doing him a disservice. God deserves the worship of latria; nothing less.
to venerate him is, to attach some deep spiritual significance to his rotting corpse is, IMHO, to bring him to shame
I'm going to post some pictures of Abraham Lincoln's tomb. I want you to tell me whether the respect paid to his rotting corpse shames Lincoln, and shames the United States.
Idol is a much broader term than we're willing to give it. We often think of OT terms in which it has to be an object we bow down to. An idol is simply anything or anybody we substitute in place of what is to be a Godward orientation, be it our devotion, our prayer, our dependence, our reliance, our love, our source, etc.
Hence, while we have earthly fathers, in reality we only have one: "And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." (Mt. 23:9) While we honor our earthly father, he is not to become a substitute for honoring God: "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me..." (Mt 10:37).
So, we wouldn't often refer to our own parents as "idols"--but if they get in the way--if they become a substitute for our "mainstream" love to God...then we are guilty of diluting that love.
All I'm saying is that for every devotion targeted to a dead saint, the main target is being missed. For every prayer devoted to a saint, the main target is being missed.
"Our objective was to bring the remains of the tomb back to light for devotional reasons, so that it could be venerated
In traditional Christian Churches of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, veneration (Latin veneratio, Greek äïõëéá dulia), or veneration of saints, is a special act of honoring a dead person who has been identified as singular in the traditions of the religion, and through them honoring God who made them and in whose image they are made. Veneration is often shown outwardly by respectfully bowing or making the sign of the cross before a saint's icon, relics, or statue. These items may also be kissed.
In Catholic and Orthodox theology, veneration is a type of honor distinct from the worship due to God alone. Church theologians have long adopted the terms latria for the sacrificial worship due to God alone, and dulia for the veneration given to saints and icons. Catholic theology also includes the term hyperdulia for the type of veneration specifically paid to Mary, mother of Jesus, in Catholic tradition. This distinction is spelled out in the dogmatic conclusions of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787), which also decreed that iconoclasm (forbidding icons and their veneration) is a heresy that amounts to a denial of the incarnation of Jesus.
SIGH
While all of this ridiculous infighting among Christians continues, Satan laughs.
dude, this story is by a RUSSIAN newspaper quoting an ITALIAN guy then translated into english. Is it possible they fumbled something in the translation?
I advise you to reread Chapter 67, Article 268, Paragaraph IIIA of the Secret Vatican Handbook. You are not supposed to let them know about the goats.
Yep. Probably romanticism--which as a style of art was still popular in the 1860's (when it was painted).
Brumidi painted the frescoes and used works in the Vatican (Michelangelo and Raphael, to name a couple) as his inspiration.
As a whole, artwork created during that time has several different characteristics (this is by no means an exhaustive list):
-Nationalism and national origin. (hence Washington in heaven)
-Forces of nature, often depicting the raw power of nature
-Human instinct
-Unlike strict neoclassicism (which centered on realism and based in part on Greek and Roman art, mythology, history, etc.), romanticism often took on a view of Renaissance and early Baroque art.
-Emotional, rather than "of the mind"
For Heaven Sakes! How much more can you HONOR/VENERATE a person by abiding by their wishes?!
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.