Catholic 'relics'...

[L.B.]

I've been to many (ok, several) Catholic shrines/cathedrals/etc. Almost all of them have 'relics' of one type or another on display for the viewing public to look at, worship or whatever the fuck. (for the uninitiated: a relic is a part of the body of a saint or some item used by or identified with that saint. There are classes of relics; a 1st class relic would be a bone or the actual corpse of a saint. 2nd class would entail their clothing or religious items like a rosary or prayer-book. 3rd class relics are things like a piece of cloth that was TOUCHED TO a first-class relic for the purpose of making the piece of cloth holy and sanctified for use as a relic.) My problem is this: Along with the fact that 'relics' were a medieval invention of the church's leadership to try and advance their cause**, there's just a huge disconnect between what they SAY they have and what people actually DO about it. F'rinstance, I've seen photos and video of parades where they supposedly had sacramental wine that had turned into actual human blood. This blood, ostensibly, is the 'blood of jebus'. So... where's the fucking pope to come and personally carry this shit to the corners of the world, with the scientific PROOF that this is, in fact, the blood of jebus (or at least verifiably the blood of a 1st century person of Israeli descent, if such determinations are/were possible)? I've physically seen and handled reliquaries (the little boxes they put this stuff in) that supposedly contained items labeled DNJC (that's Latin for Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, or, Our Lord Jesus Christ). Allegedly, these people had pieces of the robe or crown of thorns from JESUS HISMELF. Now, if you had thousands, if not millions, of people disbelieving in your deity of choice, and you were subjected to the assertions that your deity of choice was in fact an imaginary spook who never historically, literally existed, wouldn't YOU run to the ends of the earth to show off the PROOF that these relics would represent?

 

I mean, the ACTUAL BLOOD of jebus? A wafer that turned, literally, into his ACTUAL FLESH? A piece of a robe he actually wore while alive? There's even a church in the middle east somewhere that houses what they believe to be the placard that hung over jebus' head that said "jebus of nasal-drip, kink of the jews" or whatever.

 

Come on... what the fuck gives? Every fucking Catholic in the world should be running to some centralized location (Rome, maybe?) to see and venerate these ACTUAL, LITERAL relics of jebus, the blessed vigin and so on.

 

Now, I KNOW that the church says that even if these things are fake, they should be venerated when and if it helps the faith of a believer to grow stronger. Still, why should the faithful be given the choice to ask whether these things are fake? If there was even a chance that these items were real, wouldn't it do the church a whole lot of good to show them off to the world and really venerate them?

 

**NOTE: It's been shown over the centuries that the leaders of the catholic church in the middle ages, esp. during the crusades, 'providentially' found relics in the holy land that just happened to give weight to their claims that these stories of jebus, et al were true. It's kind of like if I made up a story about jebus appearing in my house and then showing you a bowl of half-eaten oatmeal and telling you that THIS OATMEAL belonged to our blessed Lard and is the ACTUAL OATMEAL upon which he feasted while visiting with me. Of COURSE, I have a bowl that he used... sure, I do. Just like the vials of tit milk from 'mary' and the veil of veronica (or the mandillion, if you prefer) or the various pieces of the head of john the 'baptist'.

 

Relics, and the apparent dichotomy between their authenticity and their veneration, really piss me off.

 

Edited for a spelling error. This is the actual rant I wrote... you should venerate it.

[Guest eejay]

I agree. If they believe the shit is real, then let's get it over with and prove it. Don't you think they would, if they could. It's all bullshit, and I am very familiar with bullshit.

[hereticzero]

If jesus was a carpenter, where's the furniture to prove it?

[gradstu09]

Did you know St Peter had about six legs? Or at least, that's about how many femurs of St Peter there are kicking around Europe.

[Crazycatlady]

Have you seen those ones of the bodies of certain saints all decked out in jewels? They always put a grin on my face. Maybe I'm slightly morbid...

[Thurisaz]

Reminds me of a nice quote from Andreas Eschbach's great novel "The Jesus video"... where a business tycoon in possession of a very inconvenient truth (to the cocklick church) tries to blackmail the Vatican. The cardinal or whatever else it was that talked to him, upon hearing this threat, grinned evilly and declared "The cocklick church does not sell truth, but meaning. Your 'truth' is of no importance to us."

 

Ain't that the truth...

[babysealclubber]

I had no idea that this sort of thing was in catholic buildings. Thanks for the breakdown.

 

Now I the expression "bones of saints" makes a little more sense.

[Alan Bragg]

Its amazing that a religion which claims to offer so much good to people that they would believe anything need to tout around these fraudulent "relics" to get people interested! What does it prove if you do or do not have a religious relic? Nothing.

[MesaGman]

It amazes me what keeps me from puking out my cookies when it comes to holy relics in ancient churches, when those relics are dead nuns, sealed in some masoleum, with the body slowly disolving into some bio goo! or half the face has been disolved. I hear the body of Mao, and Lennin, and Mhin are disolving well too. eewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

[chefranden]

I've heard that if you gathered all the pieces of the TrueCross™, you could build a wooden cathedral. Maybe that is a miracle like the multiplication of the loaves and fishes.

[MathGeek]

I don't think I ever believed in transubstantiation. During my indoctrination meetings, we never brought up relics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a church named after a particular saint because a piece of their body is stashed away somewhere in that particular church. I can't remember exactly and I'm too lazy to consult my catechism.

[Crazycatlady]

I don't think I ever believed in transubstantiation. During my indoctrination meetings, we never brought up relics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a church named after a particular saint because a piece of their body is stashed away somewhere in that particular church. I can't remember exactly and I'm too lazy to consult my catechism.

 

I think that is often the case (especially in older churches), but not always. I'm certain that my old church didn't have any of Saint Joseph's body in it. And what about the "Saint Micheal and All Angles" churches? Of course, I'm also to lazy to consult the catechism...

 

I think there is also something about the relic being "real" if it has been blessed by the pope, even if it isn't actually authentic (that would explain the six legged people).

[WCrystal]

That's a good question. But then again, we'd have to wait for the catholics/christians to reach the age of reason.

 

Looks like I'm going to be waiting for a LONG time.

 

I'm still waiting to see a statuette of a bloody guy dangling off of some pieces of wood (a supposedly "realistic" looking crucifixion) to be posed in the middle of a dental office with a sign that says, "If you don't pay your dental bill, this is what will happen to you." I think that'd be pretty funny.

[Shion]

Besides the falsehood about these relics, what really sticks in my craw is that this same institution claims that their form of worship of these material possessions isn't idolatry. Not to mention all the people they con into giving them money for the special 'healing' powers of these objects.

[Casey]

What amazes me is this. In every damned war there has ever been, there have been people who haven't served in the front lines who have gone to great lengths to acquire such grisly relics as steel helmets (when these were still in vogue) with bullet holes or worse showing. They would then take these things home and use them as props when "putting on the dog" (showing off). If the helmet had belonged to a soldier on their side, they would brag about what a lucky escape they'd had; if it had belonged to an enemy soldier they would boast of their crack marksmanship. Gawd knows how many pistols have been shown off in a similar manner; "I took this from an enemy officer, honest!" when in fact they were bought on the black market with that very trick in mind.

 

Now one would suppose that this sort of thing has provided much amusement to genuine Line Infantry Veterans over the years. One might also suppose a few of the above-described wannabes have been caught out in their lies, and that when they have been, their behaviour has (rightly), been regarded as despicable. Yet the church has got away with even more remarkable claims for centuries?!

Casey