The great bronze throne encloses a wooden chair from the ninth century, which was long thought to be St. Peter’s own chair and was placed above this monumental altar because of its great symbolic value. It expresses the permanent presence of the Apostle in the Magisterium of his successors. St. Peter’s chair, we could say, is the throne of truth which takes its origin from Christ’s commission.(extract from homily of 19 February 2012)
Steve Ray: "The ceremonial Chair of Peter in St. Peter’s Basilica. It is said that acacia wood of Peter’s 1st century chair is encased in this bronze memorial." (I previously addressed the arguments in Steve's pdf.)
- TurretinFan
8 comments:
Because it wasn't said from the chair (ex cathedra- i say this as a punn not as a serious doctrinal articulation), it doesn't really count ;) It's just the opinion of some old white dude.
I am not sure where you find the contradiction between what the Holy Father said and what Steve Ray wrote. "The great bronze throne encloses a wooden chair from the ninth century, which was long thought to be St. Peter’s own chair" implies also that the chair must have been thought to also have existed at the same time as St. Peter, who did not live in the 9th century but in the 1st. Do you get it?
Steve Ray fails to tell the reader the key point that the bronze statue encloses a 9th century chair - a pious myth - a lie.
"Steve Ray fails to tell the reader the key point that the bronze statue encloses a 9th century chair - a pious myth - a lie"
Ok, I suppose then the pope told you "that the bronze statue encloses a 9th century chair - a pious myth - [and] a lie" or are lying about the key point the pope was making?
Dozie:
I'm sorry to say, but I really don't understand your question. Steve Ray is misleading people by omitting the fact that it is known that the 9th century chair is not what people once were led to believe it was. He's perpetuating the fraud that Benedict XVI has the honesty to acknowledge.
-TurretinFan
"Steve Ray is misleading people by omitting the fact that it is known that the 9th century chair is not what people once were led to believe it was".
Where exactly did the Pope say that is now "known that the 9th century chair is not what people once were led to believe it was"? What exactly was encased and why? What was the Pope referreing to when he said " it expresses the permanent presence of the Apostle in the Magisterium of his successors. St. Peter’s chair, we could say, is the throne of truth which takes its origin from Christ’s commission"? Is the chair that is still encased in St. Peter's something other than the chair the Pope was address in the last sentence?
Here is an interesting contrast. Steve Ray says, “Below the chair are four doctors of the Church, not supporting the Chair, but acknowledging and honoring it.” The pope, on the other hand, says, “The great Chair is supported by the Fathers of the Church. The two Eastern masters, Saint John Chrysostom and Saint Athanasius, together with the Latins, Saint Ambrose and Saint Augustine, represent the whole of the tradition, and hence the richness of expression of the true faith of the one Church.” From what I can see of the sculpture, it looks like the pope is correct about the Fathers supporting the chair.
Steve ray wrote, “It is said that acacia wood of Peter’s 1st century chair is encased in this bronze memorial.” This is a little different from saying, as the pope does, that the whole wooden chair “was long thought to be Saint Peter’s own chair.” Steve is saying that some people say that there’s at least a piece of the original chair in there somewhere, and the pope is saying that the whole original chair is not there.
To help us see the harmony between these two statements, the website for St. Peter’s Basilica provides a little background for both statements, saying that the Chair “is [in fact] a throne in which fragments of acacia wood are visible, which could be part of the chair of St. Peter,” and also that “[a]n ancient tradition holds that the Apostle himself sat upon it during sermons. However, the archaeologist G.B. De Rossi, who was able to examine the venerable relic during one of the centenary festivities in 1867, the last time that the Chair was put on show, concluded that only the acacia wood skeleton dates from the early age, while the other parts in oak, anchored to the skeleton by strips of iron and the ivory plaques, belong to a re-construction of the Chair made in the Byzantine period.”
Have a blessed Lord’s day!
With love in Christ,
Pete
Mr. Holter: That is an interesting contrast as well, but not (I would think) nearly so significant. As for the alleged harmonization - the point is that Benedict XVI acknowledges it is not really a chair of Peter's within the bronze, whereas both Steve and other similar pilgrimage promoting materials do. -TurretinFan
Post a Comment