Relic Fascination

[GoodSoil]

I've also always wondered-  Like assuming that if it were just a couple of molecules of St. Patrick and that those actually stretched to all the St. Patricks' in the world.....

   What about Our Lady of Victory?  If Mary was assumed,  no body.  Or St. Gabriel's or St. Michael's.  Angels,  no corpses.  Doesn't an altar stone actually have to have a first class relic?  Clearly it must not have to be of the Saint the parish is named for or that wouldn't work.  How does that work?  Dave? Anyone?

[David W. Emery]

I wonder how many splinters of the cross of Christ are actually around. I keep thinking there must be enough splinters to make a cross the heighth of the Empire State Building.

Some time back (about a century ago, I think), somebody did a little math on this question. He started with a year or so of finding out just how many relics of the True Cross existed and how much each splinter weighed. It turned out that the the sum of the weights was less than half the estimated weight of the cross Jesus actually would have carried (actually just the crossbeam, because that was the normal practice). If the upright were included, the proportion would be much smaller.

Doesn't an altar stone actually have to have a first class relic? Clearly it must not have to be of the Saint the parish is named for or that wouldn't work.

You have it correct, Trish. An altar relic is a first class relic of a martyr, not necessarily having any connection with the name of the parish. It is installed by the bishop as part of the process of consecrating the altar and the church.

David

[GoodSoil]

Thanks David!

And I'm sorry I keep calling you Dave.  My good friend in school went by either and we had a lot of theological discussion.  Force of habit or association or something.

[David W. Emery]

Well, here on the forum we have to distinguish between Dave Armstrong and me. He goes by Dave, and I’ve always preferred David, so it tends to work out — sort of, sometimes.

[Dave Armstrong]

Seems like every job I have or any association at all, there is another Dave/David, without fail. It's a very popular name (or at least was back in the 40s and 50s when we arrived on this mortal coil).

[rbo4u2]

David W. Emery wrote:

Some time back (about a century ago, I think), somebody did a little math on this question. He started with a year or so of finding out just how many relics of the True Cross existed and how much each splinter weighed. It turned out that the the sum of the weights was less than half the estimated weight of the cross Jesus actually would have carried (actually just the crossbeam, because that was the normal practice). If the upright were included, the proportion would be much smaller.


David

Who whudda thunk? :shrugging:  Must have been someone with a lot of time on his hands.

[David W. Emery]

He must have been an apologist.

[Intercessor]

David W. Emery wrote:

He must have been an apologist.

Run.  Run fast.

[Dave Armstrong]

He must have been an apologist.

And a darned good and ambitious one, sounds like! Cut through the crap and the subjective propagandistic innuendo (very typical of Luther himself, but also Calvin and other early Protestants) with an objective, "scientific" demonstration . . . I love it!

[Pani Rose]

We have a splinter in our parish of the True Cross it is an awesome  thing to approach.  I imagine we have it because we had a major  archbishop - Archbishop Joseph Raya - as our pastor for many years.

But, one must understand the why of that splinters were sent out.   At one point the Cross was stollen, I think in the sixth century by the  Persians.  Once retreived, it was determined that it would never  happen again.  So they splinters were taken from it, and sent out  to the Churches throughout the world. 

The way we know it is the True Cross, is when St. Helena found them,  through a dream - the well these three crosses were thrown in were  covered with basil - hence if you go into a Byzantine Church you will  often find a jar of basil someone has brought in and sat in front of  the icons of the Theotokos or Christ.  She had a man placed on  each one them who was dead.  When he was placed on Christ's Cross  - the man was broght back to life.

http://www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Statues/StHelen/StHelen.htm

Here is a short write up I found, really don't have much time today to  find a better article sorry.  But, it kind of is a pretty good  summary of it.

 Jesus was crucified with two other men. The *cross upon which Jesus was  crucified came to be known as the True Cross. The first reports of the  discovery of this important *relic in Jerusalem date from the  mid-fourth century, rapidly evolved into detailed accounts (e.g., the  fifth-century apocryphal Acts of Judas Cyriacus ), and were further elaborated in works such as the * Golden Legend  , which traced the origins of the True Cross back to a shoot or branch  from the *Garden of Eden acquired by *Adam’s son Seth. This wood was  later used by *Moses to set up the brazen serpent and even later became  a bridge over a stream near Jerusalem. The *Queen of Sheba, alerted by  a vision en route to visit *Solomon, recognized Page 253  the future  significance of this wooden bridge. Eventually, the wood was taken from  the healing pool of Bethesda in order to form the cross for *Christ’s  crucifixion.  The discovery (or “invention,” from Latin invenio , “to  find”) of the True Cross in 326 was attributed to Saint *Helena by  Saint *Ambrose. Hence, Helena plays a primary role in the pictorial  narratives of the story. Alerted by an *angel to undertake a  *pilgrimage to Jerusalem, Helena questioned the *Jews and ordered the  torture of one Judas who, after being thrown into a dry well for seven  days, revealed where the three crosses had been buried. All three  crosses were excavated, but the True Cross was proven when it alone  revived a dead youth (or a dying woman). The cross was enshrined in the  church of the *Holy Sepulchre (founded by Helena), later stolen by the  Persians in 615, but returned to Jerusalem by the Byzantine emperor  *Heraclius in 630. Pieces of the True Cross were among the most sought  after and the most abundant of medieval relics.
http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/3508/True-Cross.html

[rbo4u2]

I don't mean to cast doubt or aspersions (sp?) on this but I have a serious question.  When does a fact become enmeshed in legend and how do you determine fact from legend?  I mean, could the wood be just a symbol of the fact of the cross and that in back in the mists of history someone wanted to remind or teach their followers the importance of the cross and so splintered some old wood and then passed it off as real?  Mythology is always based upon a foundation of truth, so how do you determine it's reality?  Does the testimony of church leaders who come along many years later validate the legend or the fact without really knowing for sure?  I have problems with validation through a vision that may have come from a bad bowl of prunes.  
I don't mean to be sacreligious or put down those of faith.  It may very well be a true piece of the cross.  I don't know.
Any clarification?

Rich

[David W. Emery]

Rich, I recall, as a teenager, my parents having me stay up late to watch the first landing of humans on the moon. I saw everything through the lenses of the cameras rigged up for that purpose, including the little jump down to the dusty surface and the famous words, “That’s one small step for man.…”

A few minutes later, the television commentator told of a man who had replied to a reporter that he thought the whole thing was a hoax — that man had not really gone all the way to the moon, that the man in the picture was not really walking on its surface. He insisted that it was all actors doing things right here on earth to make it seem like someone was actually out there on the moon.

My question: Was that man right? Were these men really actors right here on earth? Were the television stations playing a grand hoax on the world? How do you determine the reality?

David

[rbo4u2]

David W. Emery wrote:

My question: Was that man right? Were these men really actors right here on earth? Were the television stations playing a grand hoax on the world? How do you determine the reality?

David

I think you're comparing apples and oranges David.  We have a wealth of first hand evidence as well as scientific verification that the moon landing occurred.  One of the benefits of working at Stanford and reading the various contracts that cross my desk is I see the research going on that are based the original findings of that mission.  

The questions of the wood of the cross, relics or whatever the object may be, are often based upon the testimony of unknown sources in many cases or dreams or visions or vague general observations made by various members of the church down through the centuries of time.  They may be true, only God knows.  I'm sure due to the high value of relics in those cultures, many are true.  I'm just asking, how do you determine with any degree of accuracy the degree of validity of many of these relics?  
The one thing that is true is the faith that hundreds of thousands have put in these objects.  For me, I think God honors that faith out of his grace and mercy.  

Rich

[Pani Rose]

Some history, in these links will help to bring the clarification:
The True Cross
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04529a.htm

The second event was of even greater importance. In the year 326 the mother of Constantine, Helena, then about 80 years old, having journeyed to Jerusalem, undertook to rid the Holy Sepulchre of the mound of earth heaped upon and around it, and to destroy the pagan buildings that profaned its site, Some revelations which she had received gave her confidence that she would discover the Saviour's Tomb and His Cross. The work was carried on diligently, with the co-operation of St. Macarius, bishop of the city. The Jews had hidden the Cross in a ditch or well, and covered it over with stones, so that the faithful might not come and venerate it. Only a chosen few among the Jews knew the exact spot where it had been hidden, and one of them, named Judas, touched by Divine inspiration, pointed it out to the excavators, for which act he was highly praised by St. Helena. Judas afterwards became a Christian saint, and is honoured under the name of Cyriacus. During the excavation three crosses were found, but because the titulus was detached from the Cross of Christ, there was no means of identifying it. Following an inspiration from on high, Macarius caused the three crosses to be carried, one after the other, to the bedside of a worthy woman who was at the point of death. The touch of the other two was of no avail; but on touching that upon which Christ had died the woman got suddenly well again. From a letter of St. Paulinus to Severus inserted in the Breviary of Paris it would appear that St. Helena. herself had sought by means of a miracle to discover which was the True Cross and that she caused a man already dead and buried to be carried to the spot, whereupon, by contact with the third cross, he came to life. From yet another tradition, related by St.Ambrose, it would seem that the titulus, or inscription, had remained fastened to the Cross.    
  After the happy discovery, St. Helena and Constantine erected a magnificent basilica over the Holy Sepulchre, and that is the reason why the church bore the name of St. Constantinus. The precise spot of the finding was covered by the atrium of the basilica, and there the Cross was set up in an oratory, as appears in the restoration executed by de Vogüé. When this noble basilica had been destroyed by the infidels, Arculfus, in the seventh century, enumerated four buildings upon the Holy Places around Golgotha, and one of them was the "Church of the Invention" or "of the Finding". This church was attributed by him and by topographers of later times to Constantine. The Frankish monks of Mount Olivet, writing to Leo III, style it St. Constantinus. Perhaps the oratory built by Constantine suffered less at the hands of the Persians than the other buildings, and so could still retain the name and style of Martyrium Constantinianum. (See De Rossi, Bull. d' arch. crist., 1865, 88.)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04517a.htm

 
St Helena
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07202b.htm

[David W. Emery]

We have a wealth of first hand evidence as well as scientific verification that the moon landing occurred.

This is hindsight, with years of subsequent research to back it up. At the time this non-believer was speaking, how would you have handled it?

The one thing that is true is the faith that hundreds of thousands have put in these objects. For me, I think God honors that faith out of his grace and mercy.

I agree, and in a sense, the Church agrees: “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven” (Matthew 18:18–19). It’s a matter of religious authority, not of scientific proof.

In a sense, it’s like the many stigmatists whose wounds go through the palms of their hands. Scientists favor the wrists as “the spot” where the nail marks should be. The Church’s verdict, however, is that the position is immaterial, that it is ultimately a question of faith and holiness, not of physical exactitude.

David