A Morbid Connection to Heaven:

An Investigation of Relics & The Modern Need for Them

Chapter One: History (Part Two)

  There were several reasons used to justify the stealing of relics. First was the basic need of relics for new churches and religious organizations that were being established; the churches had to possess a relic before they could be properly consecrated. When there was a strong devotion to a particular saint, the physical remains of that saint tended to appear to act as a focal point for the devotion. Relics were also used as a form of spiritual protection against the injustice of secular authority. This, in turn, lead to competition amongst the religious communities of whom had who of the holy dead, spurring translations. Relics were also a source of income for monasteries from the donations that pilgrims would give in hope of intercessions from the saint. So in a sense relics of a saint became a form of a fund raiser for a community and even collectible items, and owning them became a symbol of prestige for cities, kingdoms, and monarchs.

It is hard to overstate the importance of the cult of the relics during the Middle Ages. They were used in the dedication of churches where they were integrated into the altar; they were used in law courts for swearing oaths; relics were found on the battlefield as suggested by the description of Roland's sword in the Song of Roland. In short, relics were an integral part of daily life and were accepted unquestioningly. The cult of the relics played a critical role in the missionary activities. The missionaries who converted northern Europe were dealing with people whose religion was fundamentally animistic. To them, it seemed that the entire world was inhabited and controlled by unseen powers; every tree had its own spirit, every pool its devil, every mountain its god. There was no distinction between the laws of nature and the laws of God. In accepting Christianity, pagans believed Christ's powers to be more potent than those of their former gods. The converts expected the new God to intervene as often and as powerfully in nature as the old, and if He failed to do so, they would frequently revert to their old beliefs. Gregory the Great recommended to Augustine of Canterbury that the cult of the saints and martyrs be presented to the English as the rival to pagan animism.

As the Medieval Age wore on, “relics came to be displayed more prominently in the churches” more so than before; even the reliquaries and altar tombs became more ornate to draw attention to the strange treasure. This brought a greater demand unto the relic market; so when the Crusades allowed access to the Holy Land for Western Europe and the saints that rested there, it was a welcome conflict. When Constantinople was sacked in 1204, a great number of relics were found and sent back, including those of Saint Catherine of Alexandria. But for some reason, when the relics were sent back, they were not sent in their original reliquaries. Since the relics were not in their reliquaries, there was only the word of the relic-monger that the bones were those of a saint. With the lack of identification, the relic market was flooded by false relics, and it became hard to distinguish between the true saint relic and bones of an animal. The Council of Lyon forbade anyone to venerate any relic new on the scene without proper approbation by the Pope.  But once the relic was discovered, authenticated and enshrined in a church, pilgrims came flocking. Setting out on a pilgrimage to visit shrines that housed a relic became a way to be blessed and forgiven of sins. Often pilgrimages were prescribed by confessors as a form of penance.

The veneration of relics had a strong following until the sixteenth century, when the Protestant Reformation occurred. The Protestants had a rather violent reaction against the cult of relics and the saints to whom they belong, particularly the idea of saintly intercession. Martin Luther opposed the use of relics since many had no apparent proof of historic authenticity or any biblical support; it also “constitute[d] a reliance on works rather than on faith.”  Luther saw the cult of relics as an invention of the Roman Church. John Calvin rejected relics based on theology; and his followers, particularly in Northern Europe, destroyed many reliquaries, melting them and taking the precious gems that adorned them.  Calvin himself, though, confined his attacks to relics that appeared to be improbable, such as the multiple heads of Saint John the Baptist and even claimed that if one took all the pieces of the True Cross and put them together it would make a large ship. The Huguenots in France were probably the most violent when destroying reliquaries.  Some of the French churches still bear the marks of their attacks.  In England, many relics were destroyed, especially the relics of Saint Thomas à Becket, which were taken from their reliquary, burned, and the ashes spread to the winds, though some say that Becket's bones were hidden elsewhere in the Cathedral.

The Council of Trent convened in 1545 in response to the criticisms of the Protestants. The Council, in its twenty-fifth session, stressed that, despite the lack of Biblical support, the veneration of relics was a legitimate devotion basing on the Apostolic tradition and the constant practices of the Church. There was also an affirmation of what earlier councils (such as Council of Lyon) and synods had said, especially the condemnation of anyone who denied the cult of relics as false or unholy. It also stressed the need for the cult of relics to be under the direct supervision of the Holy See and not the local bishops. Much of what Trent did to reorganize the veneration of relics still holds true today.

After Trent, however, the devotion to relics never returned to the level of fervor it had before the Protestant Reformation. Not much attention was given to them until the theologian F. Suarez collected the teachings concerning relics and commented upon them. He built his argument on top of Saint Augustine's saying that “the relation between the saint and his relics is not to be sought in physical continuity … but in the reason on which the moral dignity of the relics is based.”  Around the age of so-called Enlightenment, theologians had differing views of the cult of relics. Some viewed the cult of relics on a different, even a lower, level then that of the cult of saints, but others viewed the cult on the same level. Saint Robert Bellarmine, in his De Ecclesia trimphanti distinguished the respect and honor given to relics here on Earth and the honor given to the saints in Heaven. Cardinal Billuart explains that relics as materiel objects have absolutely no right to be venerated, and that this right comes in the formal aspect in which they are worthy of the same veneration as the saint.

The cult of relics has never been a foreign idea in the Catholic Church; it has been there since the beginning and is by no means an invention of the Medieval Church. It has been an integral part the the Church's development and has aided in the strengthening of the resolve of the faithful. This veneration of the holy dead still plays a role today in the Church and should not be discontinued.

End of Part Two.

End of Chapter One.
To Be Continued............
(Copyright: Belongs to the Wanderer)
(If interested in research please contact me.)