Archaeologist Paolo Lorizzo, an Oriental Studies graduate and a postgraduate in Egyptology at the Sapienza University of Rome, has recently written on “Zenit.it” about the burial of Saint Peter in the Vatican Necropoli, a burial which is confirmed by literary sources and by archaeological findings.

Every historian worthy of the name knows that Peter died a martyr’s death during the reign of the Roman emperor Nero in 64 AD, in the “Circus of Nero”, that he was buried not far from the place of his martyrdom, and that over his grave emperor Constantine ordered the building of the Old Vatican Basilica at the beginning of the IV century. Literary sources can help us piece together what happened after the martyrdom; to start with, there’s the account of Clement, the leader of the Christian Roman community of the I century, who describes the persecution by Nero, of which Peter was one of the many victims. Two texts dating back to the II century, the “Ascension of Isaiah” and the “Apocalypse of Saint Peter”, confirm that the death of Peter took place in Rome with the martyrdom by Nero in 64 AD. Moreover, the presence in Rome of the Apostle is supported by the fact that nobody in the past has ever claimed to have his tomb, which is a sign that the sources that focus their attention in the area of the capital are in fact reliable.

Speaking about the tomb of the Apostle, it is also useful to read the accounts of Eusebius, a Church historian of the III-IV century who quotes a Roman presbyter, Gaio, who had defined the burial as the “trophy” of Peter in Vatican. Painstaking researches aimed at confirming the literary sources was carried out, under the Pontificate of Pius XII starting in 1939.

Archaeologists found an ancient necropolis, located parallel to the Circus of Nero, which emperor Constantine decided to fill with earth at the beginning of the IV century to level out the ground for the future Basilica. Directly below the Papal altar they also found a series of monuments and altars constructed over the monument built by order of Constantine between 321 and 326 – before the construction of the Old Basilica – directly on the site of Peter’s tomb. Therefore, the Constantine monument comprised three existing monuments: the graffiti wall, with ancient inscriptions and many epigraphs which show the high degree of devotion of believers of thate time; the red wall-; the aedicula with an ancient grave on the ground – called “terragna” – which is the foundation above which all of these monuments were built. However, they found this grave empty.

The findings of Margherita Guarducci, whose researches were carried out from 1952 to 1965, played a key role in the process of reaching the certainties that we now hold: she studied the graffiti wall noticing the overabundant presence of the «name Peter, expressed through the letters P, PE, PET and usually joined with the name of Christ, with the symbol of Christ, with His initials and with the name of Mary and, above all, the great recurrence on the wall of praises in honour of the victory of Christ, of Peter and Mary. There also were writings in memory of the Holy Trinity, of Christ as the second Person of the Trinity, and so on. The whole Theology of the time was on that wall».

In September 1953 the Italian archaeologist discovered Peter’s bones: they originally lay in the grave called “terragna”, as the Tradition of the Church had always claimed. However, Constantine decided to move them inside a niche – a loculos faced with marble (porphyry, to be exact) – in the graffiti wall, the wall built in honour of Peter; they were folded in a precious cloth and placed in the loculos. During the researches of the 40s nobody noticed the presence of these bones – entirely covered with detritus – with the exception of a pious man, Monsignor Kaas, who was concerned that these remains wouldn’t be treated with the respect they deserved, and therefore secretly ordered them to be stored elsewhere for safe-keeping. It is only “by chance” then, that a friend of Margherita Guarducci, anthropologist Venerando Correnti, decided to examine these bones stored in a box in a safe place in the “Grotte Vaticane”; he thought there was something curious about them and consulted the archaeologist Guarducci. The results of the examination showed that they belonged to a man in his sixties and of compact build. Moreover, there were traces of soil compatible with the soil contained in the grave “terragna”; this proves that the remains had indeed been contained in that grave before the move into the loculos by Constantine. Another examination of the loculos of the graffiti wall – also known as wall “g” – led the archaeologist to find out a graffito in Greek that reads “Here is Peter”.

It was pope Paul VI in 1968 who announced that the relics were those of the Apostle Peter and this claim was never proven to be wrong. In 1953, in Jerusalem, two archaeologists discovered an ossuary of a Christian community of Jerusalem, with some very familiar Biblical names on it: “Shimon Bar Yonah“, that is to say, the original Biblical name of the disciple Peter, together with Jesus, Joseph, Judas, Matthew, Martha, Mary and Mariame. Some protestants and anti-clericals claim that this is the proof that Peter wasn’t buried in Rome, but the scientific community rejected this theory, mainly because it wouldn’t  have made any sense to refer to Peter with his original name and not with “Cefa” or “Peter”.

The editorial staff

The Supreme Court of India canceled the decision of the High Court of Delhi in July 2009 which decriminalized homosexual intercourse, thereby upholding the constitutional validity of section 377 of the Criminal Code and accepting the complaints of a large part of the population and many Hindu cultural and religious associations.

Cardinal Oswald Gracias, archbishop of Mumbai and president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India, has protested against the decision, saying that “the Catholic Church has never been opposed to the decriminalization of homosexuality, because we have never seen gay people as criminals. As Christians we express our full respect for homosexuals. The Catholic Church is opposed to the legalization of gay marriage, but teaches that homosexuals have the same dignity of every human being“.

On the other hand, in Catholic Italy homosexuality was decriminalized back in 1866, well before Anglican Great Britain (1967), Communist East Germany (1968), Lutheran Norway (1972 ) and Israel (1988). The Catholic Catechism condemns the “sin” itself, defining “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically disordered” but teaches that we accept the “sinner”, in fact homosexuals “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

Although we can only look with sadness at the decision of the Supreme Court of India, we are glad to learn that, a few days after the positive news of natural families in Croatia, the Australian High Court has unanimously banned same-sex marriages, a few days after the first few were celebrated in the capital Canberra. In Italy, on the other hand, the Regional Council of Emilia-Romagna has denied any de facto equalization between heterosexual and homosexual couple, rejecting two amendments proposed by Franco Grillini, a regional council member of the joint group (former IDV [Italy of Values]) and honorary president of Arcigay.

Morever the European Parliament has definitively rejected the Estrela report on “Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights”, which would have sponsored abortion as a human right, fertilization and the “gender” theory, whereby European countries would have been expected to provide to everybody, even to very young people (without parental consent), contraception, assisted reproduction, retraining courses for teachers, compulsory school courses on gender identity and homosexuality.

There remains concern about the turn of events in India, but also happiness for the news from Europe.

Editorial Staff,  translation by Vito

In the latest edition of the “Meeting” in Rimini, organized by the ecclesial movement “Communion and Liberation”,  were presented the conversion stories of two intellectuals born under state atheism.

The first  one is Tianyue Wu, professor of philosophy at Peking University: «I come from a Catholic family but for me it was hard to embrace religion», he said. «At school they would teach us that religions are just superstitions, monsters that belong to a dead and buried past. Chinese society is completely  secularized, with its “Carpe diem” motto, and Chinese people have now adopted a cynical and utilitarian attitude, due to the major economic growth and the consequent spiritual impoverishment». However, he stated, «After so many years of atheist education people still feel that they need to find something that goes beyond life on earth».

China is a country where already the early missionaries found it hard to «introduce the idea of a transcendent God among people who thought that the only thing that existed was life on earth, nothing else». What is more, the «communist government made things worse by using atheism as an essential part of its ideology, as it sent the missionaries away, as it closed churches and forced the priests that were left not to exercise their ministry.» Even after Mao’s death and the reopening of churches, «the background remained hostile to religion. On the one side this was a difficulty, on the other it was a bright side for believers: you were forced to ask yourself which where the reasons for believing and to gain a deeper consciousness of yourself».

«In a secularized society as China is, I believe that reason and the rational thought of Saint Thomas, Saint Augustine and Aristotle may represent the best way to get closer to faith »; this is why he started to hold lectures about them, even if they weren’t very successful at first. But «if I had given up, and had discussed topics which were more popular, I wouldn’t have given to my students the chance to realize how faith and reason are actually bond. And today many are those who attend my lectures». He confessed: «I’m sure that when I show the rationality of faith, even through the “Summa” of Thomas Aquinas, I sow a seed in the heart of my students which will help them face such a secularized time as ours, so full of challenges».

Here below the testimony of Tianyue Wu

Russian Aleksandr Filonenko was the another guest of the “Meeting“; educated as nuclear physicist, he is theologian as a passion and philosopher as a profession. From the very beginning he, too, rejected Christianity, because he thought it was boring: «We were taught that religion was nothing more than a way to compensate. If you were ill or weak, you would need the crutch of religion in order to be able to walk; on the contrary, if you were atheist, then you could do without it. And I felt I was strong.»

As he was 20, something started to change after he read about the life of father Pavel Florenskij, the Russian philosopher, mathematician and priest condemned to 10 years in the lager: «It struck me to read how father Pavel could keep his energy as a scholar and a creative person, even in the lager. I couldn’t help asking myself: where is this energy coming from? And when I discovered that it came from the relationship with Christ, I thought: “If he, too, is a sick man, an invalid, then I also want to be with the invalids and not with the atheists, who are awfully more boring“». Thus he started to look for «someone to follow, who could lead me to Christ, because I didn’t know how to get there by myself»; it’s a mystery how he met Antonio di Surozh, founder of the Orthodox church of England. «When I met him», he explained, «I got the essence of his message: if you want to get to know Christ, you’ve got to be open to an encounter, from which faith begins. Faith begins in the joy that we feel when we realize that God calls us by name »

Here below the testimony of Aleksandr Filonenko

«Unfortunately, on this matter the Catholic thought is often misunderstood, as if the Church supported the idea of a non-stop fertility, urging married couples to procreate without any judgment or any plan in mind. However, it only takes an accurate reading of the pronouncements of the Magisterium to see that it isn’t true». These are the words of John Paul II of July 1994.

He also added: «As they consider the decision of generating or not generating life, they must let themselves be inspired not from egoism or superficiality, but from a prudent and conscious generosity, which may evaluate the possibilities and the circumstances […] Therefore, when there is a reason not to procreate, this choice is permissible and may even be necessary. However, there remains the duty of carrying it out with criteria and methods that respect the total truth of the marital act in its unitive and procreative dimension, as wisely regulated by nature itself in its biological rhythms. One can comply with them and use them to advantage, but they cannot be “violated” by artificial interferences»

It’s also interesting to read the recent article of Dr. Gregory K. Popcak, director of the Catholic organization “Pastoral Solutions Institute”. He wrote: «Catechized by friends, family, and the media who all think the Catholic Church hates sex –unless it’s being used to keep a woman barefoot and pregnant–many couples don’t believe the Church has anything good, much less useful or interesting, to say about sex. If you are one of those couples.  Welcome.  […] But let me share something with you that your friends, family, and the media don’t know. […] The Catholic Church–in fact, God–wants you to have an amazing sex life that will only become more passionate the longer you are married».

This July US News & World Report ran an article with the headline “Devout Catholics Have Better Sex, Study Says”. The article draws on the statements of the “Family Research Council“, based on decades of research and especially on a study of the University of Chicago which found the most enjoyable and most frequent sex occurring among those married couples who attend church at least once a week (the article then cites other studies that have nothing to do with the topic, referring to them as foregoing studies). Popcak, who also wrote many books on the Catholic catechism of sexuality (such as “Holy Sex! A Catholic Guide to Toe-Curling, Mind-Blowing, Infallible Loving”), explained the reasons for such results: in order to have a satisfactory sexual intercourse it is necessary «to bring your whole self (physical, relational, spiritual) to the experience.  You have to be comfortable with your body (the physical dimension). […] Leaving out any one of these three dimensions makes sex less interesting and less pleasurable.  Devout Catholics, especially those using NFP, are prepared to bring all three of these dimensions to their marital sexuality. […] NFP couples are intimately aware of the body, […] Likewise, NFP couples are challenged to communicate on a deeper level than other couples about the nature of their desire for each other, for children, and for other needs and concerns.  Finally, NFP couples realize that sex isn’t just a physical act but a spiritual one». (Just think about the “Song of Songs”)

He goes on: «devout Catholics are better lovers because we understand that sex isn’t just about sex.  It’s ultimately about becoming better, more passionate, more authentically loving people and the joy we experience in the bedroom is a sign of that effort we make 24/7 to become what God is calling us to be. […] Because they know that being great lovers doesn’t just refer to what goes on inside the bedroom but also to how they relate to each other all day long, they make a conscious effort take better care of each other in every aspect of their lives».

Sexuality is a gift from God and this is why it is to be taken seriously, but certainly it isn’t to be opposed. The Church never did that, despite what many people think. In fact, complete abstinence is a vocation that few choose (priests, nuns and so on) and it isn’t required from every Catholic. At the same time, sex isn’t to be interpreted only as having procreation goals: procreation should be a responsible act subjected to the virtue of prudence and if this virtue demands a break in the procreative act, then married couples can benefit from the natural periods of infertility of the woman. This is also because sex has a unitive goal. The Church teaches us that when you have good reasons not to procreate (such as medical, economical, social reasons, as pope Pius XII explained), this choice is legitimate and it could even be necessary. The thinking of the late Dr. Bruto Maria Bruti is useful to delve into this topic.

There remains the duty of carrying out this non-procreative sexuality with criteria and methods that respect the total truth of the marital act, as wisely regulated by nature itself in its biological rhythms. All those couples who attend premarital counseling organized by the Diocese know this very well; they are taught NFP methods to control fertility. You can read on the “Roman Observer“: «The Church agrees with the natural control of fertility, that is to say, with those methods based on the understanding and the respect of the hints and messages conveyed by our body». Popcak concluded: «Maybe the Church really isn’t doing this because it wants to meddle in your life.  Maybe the Church really does want to help you experience all the passion and love God wants to give you. Maybe the Church really does have something to say that your friends, family, and most of the media doesn’t have the first clue about».

The editorial staff

Lola Velarde, president of the Institute for Family Policies in New York, denounced at the UN headquarters the falsity of feminism as it claims the need to legalize abortion in order to decrease maternal mortality. These are old lies, which studies have fully proven to be wrong.

In her speech at the conference of the 19^th September she explained that «it isn’t possible to reach the UN Millennium Development Goals unless you grant the right to life and to family». She proceeded to debunk the main myth of pro-abortionists: maternal health. Through this myth they wanted to manage the recent cases in Beatriz, El Salvador, and Savita, Ireland, failing in both of them. She mentioned the case of Ireland, a nation with strict abortion laws (in fact, abortion is performed only in the case of a real risk of death of the mother), a  nation considered by the World.  Health Organization (WHO) as the safest country in the world to give birth.

Dr Monique V. Chireau, professor at University Medical Center in North Carolina (USA) also gave a speech, in which she explained that the low maternal mortality rate of Ireland shows that «treatment of high risk pregnancies doesn’t require a false choice between the needs and the rights of the mother and those of the baby. In fact, data of the British Health Department show that in the last 20 years not a single abortion was necessary to save the life of the mother». Moreover, Dr Chireau underlined that «doctors have the duty to give assistance taking into account either the interests of the mother and those of the baby ».

It isn’t a coincidence that the recent Medical Symposium in Dublin — organized by the “Committee for Excellence in Maternal Healthcare”, chaired by Eamon O’Dwyer, Professor, emeritus, of Obstetrics and Gynaecology National University of Ireland (NUI) and attended by the main experts of the medical area, gynecologists, psychologists and molecular biologists — concluded that «direct abortion  – the deliberate destruction of the unborn – is never medically necessary to save the life of a woman» and that «the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women»

Chile is another example of the connection between pro-life legislation and safe maternity, since it has the second lowest maternal mortality rate of the American continent (after Canada). Dr Elard Koch, director of the Institute of Molecular Epidemiology (MELISA), spoke about the Chilean case: he presented a thorough study with data from the last 50 years, showing that maternal mortality in Chile decreased by 69 percent since the ban on abortion of 1989. Koch also presented data about Mexico, as he compared 14 countries with permissive laws about abortion with 18 countries with more restrictive laws: he showed that the latter have lower maternal mortality rates .

The editorial staff

 
 
by Eliseo Del Deserto
 

From the blog of Blog di Eliseo Del Deserto, 28/09/13

Dear Mr. Guido Barilla,

I’m writing because it is me who wishes to ask your forgiveness! I’m a homosexual guy and I followed the debate that sparkled by your statement. I was bothered by the multiplying brouhaha, by the pointless battles: “shall we boycott or not“, by the insipid list of the other pasta brands, by the fact that your picture was insulted and acclaimed.

I’ve been living away from home for 4 years now and I can’t eat any other pasta brands, even if I would spare money, because the only one that reminds me of my family is the Barilla. Maybe it’s because of advertising, maybe just because it’s the only pasta brand that my mother ever cooked for me. I’m homosexual and I believe in the traditional family, too; and I don’t think that other kind of unions could ever be defined as “evolution of family“.

When we are still little or young and we realize that we are homosexuals, we find it out for ourselves: we are different. At the beginning, many people (no generalization here) consider this diversity as a handicap. After a first despair we seek a balance, a reason, happiness. Each and every one of us has his/her own diversity to manage, that’s the truth.

It is right to understand the traits of our diversity, to accept its limits. For example, two men will never generate a child. Two women will never be a family, as it is considered in its traditional meaning. I’m not saying that homosexual unions should be outlawed or banished, and I’m sure that in a homosexual couple there can be a kind of warmth which is close to family intimacy. However, the majority of us come from a traditional family. We are all sons and daughters! We know how much we need a father, a father who is a real man, and a mother, a mother who thoroughly is a woman! I know this, every time that I deeply wish for a strong man to be next to me.

Please forgive us Mr. Barilla! For the humiliating words that you had to suffer, you and your firm, because of us, the homosexuals. Even if some people will disagree with me. I apologize to you, and I do it as one of them, despite everything else. Please forgive all the insults, the pressures, the boycotts, all the fruitless words of that bunch of roaring souls who just go around looking for someone to devour. Those people who had you apologize for words which weren’t offensive at all, they have so much to learn about family.

The violent, persecutory, intimidating attitude of these people, therefore a bully attitude, together with the many utterances of gay pride that have been growing with the passing of time, they make me feel everything but the pride of being homosexual. Again, please forgive us!

Eliseo Del Deserto

This is the first article of the English version of “UCCR” (Union of Catholic Christian Rationalists), an online association of some young friends who are willing to support the rationality of the Christian faith, following the steps of Pope  Emeritus Benedict XVI, and to defend Catholic stances (and the stances of the Holy See) on many, different subjects.

It is essential to clear up a widespread misunderstanding straightaway: we realise that the term “rationalism” might be interpreted as an antithesis to the Catholic faith, if it means that reason is the only way to arrive at the truth (as thoroughly explained in the Catholic Encyclopedia). This claim is wrong if by “reason” one means “positivist reason” – as it is considered nowadays – that is a form of reason that requires proof and scientific demonstrations. This kind of rationalism is inevitably (and by definition) atheistic.

However, it is clear that this rationalistic attitude will not achieve a complete understanding of our experience, because we experience phenomena which stretch far beyond the biological, the physical and the chemical fields. It is therefore necessary to broaden the concept of reason. As Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said, in his famous Regensburg lecture of 2006 at the meeting with the representatives of science: the intention is of “broadening our concept of reason and its application”. “We will succeed in doing so”, he goes on, “if reason and faith come together in a new way […] if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically falsifiable, and if we once more disclose its vast horizons”.

By way of example, the reasoning process applied to the most important human decisions, and in particular in law courts, is based not on strict logical ‘deduction’ involving repeatable, measurable experiments; it is based on what philosophers call ‘induction’ and ‘abduction’, seeking to infer the best possible explanation from a range of sources, including human testimony and historical evidence.

Therefore, if the term reason is not synonymous with accurate and repeatable measurability, but is instead the tool of interpreting all factors of reality, then faith itself becomes a natural way of knowledge that applies reason. In order to know some factors of reality, reason uses faith, which can be considered an extension of reason itself. That is to say, faith makes reason see what reason alone would never understand. Consequently it is reasonable to have faith in God if you have had ​​a specific experience of God (the so-called “Christian encounter”), if you have valid reasons to believe, if you are “ready to give an answer to anyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Pt 3,15); likewise it is unreasonable if you believe according to a weak sentimentalism, to a deist mysticism, if you believe because of the fear of death or because you need a simple answer to what still remains unknown to mankind.

It is from this perspective that we interpret “rationalism” as the use of reason, considered as the best guide for faith and behaviour in general. It is true that human knowledge is based on reason, but it is not positivist reasoning. It is the kind of broad reason that uses faith as a way of understanding reality.

Precisely to avoid this inevitable misunderstanding, we named ourselves “rational Catholics” in the Italian version of the website. This was however impossible in the English version, for it would have requred us to change our acronym UCCR into URCC (Union of Rational Catholic Christians). Our staff have therefore decided to keep the original acronym replacing “rational” with “rationalists”. We have explained above that we can regard these two terms as synonyms if we consider reason as a tool of knowledge which is open to all the factors of reality, including those that are not scientifically measurable.

In summary, our Catholic Christian faith starts from, and is based on, three pillars: the historical reliability of an event, the recognition of the credibility of its witnesses – in particular Peter as an individual, and the Catholic Church as a human and divine institution, founded on the apostolic succession (Mt. 16,18), and finally our own personal experience in relation to reality. Concerning this last point, we can see every day the validity of the Church’s claims, mainly its claim to represent Jesus Christ, historically permanent. For these three reasons (which will be explored in more detail on the site), we regard our faith in God as a decision motivated by reason: thus, a rational decision.

The Editorial Staff

INDEX TOPICS
|Pope Francis||Pope Benedict XVI|
|Famous Christians and Catholics||Church and Catholicism in the world|
|Catholics and policy||Theological answers| |Discrimination against christians||Pedophilia scandal in the Church|
|Economy and Vatican||Woman: ordination and role in the Church|
|Private schools |Film and faith|| Music and faith|| Sport and faith|

—————–

POPE FRANCIS

—————–

THEOLOGICAL ANSWERS

Trinity and monotheism: answers to the most common questions (4/20/18)
Doesn’t the Trinity contradict monotheism? Are arguments of Trinity based on Holy Bibl

—————–

ABORTION AND CONTRACEPTION

Abortion doctor admits: «I chose this job for give birth, not kill children» (7/4/18)
Abortion civil rights? It’s not the opinion of abortion gynegologysts, like Dr. Michele Mariano

—————–

PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

«If science exists, this means that there’s a Logic», fame physicist said (4/5/18)
Science & faith in the words of Antonino Zichichi, professor emeritus of Physics.

—————–

IRREDUCIBILITY OF HUMAN BEING, PHILOSOPHICAL NATURALISM AND SCIENTIST REDUCTIONISM

American Court: Chimpanzees are not considerable as human beings (1/6/15)
The science shows that Chimpanzees haven’t self-consciousness and self-determination .