Relics. does authenticity matter?

martinedwards

I personally don't get it.

there are enough authentic fragments of the cross to build a full size Noah's ark.

and on top of that, the idea that a bunch of folk could be fore sighted enough to creep up to the execution site and nick the cross that had probably already been put into use for the next execution….. frankly, that would be a miracle on par with the resurrection.

As to the veneration of a corpse…. or fragments of what may claim to be part of a corpse from hundreds of years ago…..

Any biblical support for this at all?

or is it all just another money making scam to shame even the American Tele-evangelists?

NIMAN

The last thing you said.

All a scam.

Rigsby

Post deleted.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058382730/relics-does-authenticity-matter

While all of these relics seem extremely unlikely to be authentic, many do at least predate the televangelists. e.g. Carbon dating shows the shroud of Turin to originate from 1260CE and 1390CE

L Grey

People who were deemed as extraordinary were always venerated in some way.

That's not unique to religious figures.

NIMAN

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122905760#Comment_122905760

The difference being, the likes of Michael Jordan, Lionel Messi, Muhammed Ali, Elvis, Da Vinci, Michelanglo or other person who are/were venerated in some way, were actually were really good.

They weren't frauds or charlatans.

L Grey

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122905809#Comment_122905809

Funny you mention Muhammad Ali, his legacy has always been questioned.

Female abuse, the cheating in the Cooper fight, the racial abuse, draft dodging etc.

Yet here we are choosing the focus on the good thing about him; and celebrating those.

It's always more nuanced than the knee-jerk binary think and the agenda pushers.

banie01

The Relic industry is generally attributed to St Helena, the mother of Constantine. Her "discovery" of the true cross worked out nicely for an Emperor looking to build support for his reforms and to building the primacy of Constantinople.

An interesting article on the rise in the medieval relic trade is below. It is generally ascribed to the rising difficulty of pilgrims accessing the holy land and enterprising European towns and churches spotting a business opportunity. Those pilgrims who couldn't make it to the Levant? Had money that could be spent more locally if an appropriate religious attraction could be delivered.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/a-business-of-bones-relic-trafficking-in-the-middle-ages

On the actual topic of relics and their validity in liturgical thinking? I'm not religious, I don't have a faith but I do have an interest in learning about religion to build on my own knowledge as a very lapsed catholic.

There is a catholic tradition of veneration for the saints and associated relics as they can intercede on behalf of those using them. Were I a Christian? That belief would fail the auld 1st commandment (and probably 2nd too) test for me. If one believes that God commanded no one be honoured before (or beside) him? And that no image or idol should be worshipped? Then praying for intercession via a Saint or their relic is at odds with that IMHO.

There's plenty of canon, philosophy & liturgy that makes the case for Relics and Saintly intercession being appropriate and that's all very valid if you share the faith.

I take the view that the simplest and most direct relationship with whomever one parts to, is the best. It also keeps well with the earliest of the abrahamic commandments.

Hotblack Desiato

I was brought up a Catholic but always found the adoration of relics to be deeply weird. We regard it as appalling that in recent decades organs of dead babies were retained for medical study, but you can go and see St. Valentine's heart, or Oliver Plunkett's head! It seems that dignity in death is a rather variable concept.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122905985#Comment_122905985

We are all human and we are all flawed in our own ways.

I find it funny that people being interviewed are often asked who their heroes are. Heroes are a mythological concept really, it's OK to have heroes when you're a child but an adult should be able to realise that nobody is perfect.

BTW I would regard dodging the Vietnam draft as a righteous act.

Hotblack Desiato

There is a catholic tradition of veneration for the saints and associated relics as they can intercede on behalf of those using them. Were I a Christian? That belief would fail the auld 1st commandment (and probably 2nd too) test for me. If one believes that God commanded no one be honoured before (or beside) him? And that no image or idol should be worshipped? Then praying for intercession via a Saint or their relic is at odds with that IMHO.

The more I learned about the Reformation in history class, the more it seemed that the RCC had got it wrong on most of the contentious issues… I mean if the Bible is the foundation of the Christian faith, so much of what the RCC does and believes is just not in there or is even contradicted by what is in there.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058382730/relics-does-authenticity-matter

The authenticity of relics is only a matter of concern to those who believe in them.

For the rest of us who don't it is of little relevance.

(by the way Ali was not a draft dodger, he was a conscientious objector for religious reasons.

He stood his ground and accepted the sanctions imposed)

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122906462#Comment_122906462

Even pre Luther, the Lollards, Hussites, Urquists and Cathars all had a very different flavour on what worship should be. Currently reading a history of 30yrs war that touches on the issues with faith, confessional choices and their political implications as the basis for that war. Really interesting to see how the Hapsburgs managed that aspect of their empire but, totally off topic here.

Thinkingaboutit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122906462#Comment_122906462

The Biblical Canon took its recognisable form thanks to St Jerome working at what became the Vulgate at the authority of Pope St Damasus I. The very Bible (we must call that term in a plural sense as earlier peoples usually might have with them a translation or extract of one or two books of the Bible, given the sheer expense of a codex for ordinary people) exists thanks to the Church. Luther in his tendentious translation shoved the Epistle of St James, which contracts Protestantism on works to the end with the same for Maccabees given that it enjoins prayers for the dead. Protestantism in its innumerable forms is ultimately just a poor knock off of the Church Christ entrusted to St Peter. 'The more I learned…' suggests that your history education has a predictably anti-Catholic bias. That is unsurprising these days.

The Biblical case for relics can be simply put. Rather than simply letting the Romans dispose the body of Christ, as usually happened for those so executed, Joseph of Arimathea asked that Pilate release His body (Mark 15:43) and provided his own newly made tomb (Matt 27:60). Nicodemus provided a quantity of spices to wrap in our Saviour's shroud. The women came to His tomb (Matt 28:1) and further anointed it with spices (Mark 16:1, Luke 24:1). This was the act of reverence for the physical remains of our Saviour. Obviously the remains of Jesus were to be a relic for a matter of some hours.

One claim is that the relics of the True Cross would weight many tonnes, when in fact the known relics provide the material for less than a third of a cross.

In the centuries of the early Christian era, the tombs of the martyrs in the Catacombs of Rome became places for special reverence including special liturgical feasts, prayer and Mass as then understood. Outside of Rome, after St Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, a disciple of St John the Apostle, was martyred by burning c. 156 AD. After initial burning, another burning of the remains occurred at the instance of local Jews with the governor. Yet local Christians still gathered the precious relics of this Saint which were more precious to them than gold dust. A scholar writing in 2010 dates that account in its original form to the year 200 AD with many recension, summaries, translations after. I would give more authority to something so close in time to our Lord over the speculations of a over-promoted, scrupulous Augustinian Professor in the 1520s. A solely spiritual understanding of Christianity and the rejection of physical signs like relics of martyrs and holy places ultimately dates to the Manicheans and their heresy.