THE VISIT AND VENERATION OF RELICS - PART 1

Fr Billy Swan

The veneration of relics in the Catholic Church has a long history and one that is not without controversy. This controversy is not complex or difficult to understand. It centres on their proper veneration, their link to the witness of saints and their role in directing Christians of every age to belief in Christ and to worship God alone. Regrettably, the history of the Church includes times when this proper veneration was not observed, leading to exaggerations, superstitions and commercialism as the evolving cult of relics drifted away from the essential foundation of faith.

Here in Ireland, visits of relics are common.

As I write these words, the relics of St Carlo Acutis are about to visit dioceses and parishes. In 2024 there were at least two major visits of the relics of saints – one being the visit of the relics of St Bernadette of Lourdes from September to November and the other being the visit of the relics of St Killian to his native diocese of Kilmore in October that year. From my own experience and from conversations with laity, priests and religious who were involved in these visits, the feedback was very positive. There were large crowds, a spirit of good will, well attended liturgies and a positive energy that lifted morale in parishes and dioceses. People came to venerate the relics who rarely come to Church. This phenomenon revived a spirit of hope that faith is still important in the lives of many. These positive experiences from recent visits of relics, reminded me of the visit of the relics of St Therese of Lisieux that came to Ireland back in the Spring of 2001when there were even bigger crowds, beautiful liturgies, all night vigils and countless personal testimonies of the healing impact the visit had on human lives. There was a remarkable energy around the visit and a wide appeal that transcended the relics themselves.

Yet, during these visits, the age-old reservations about the cult of relics were never too far away. These amounted to questions and comments such as: ‘Isn’t it all a bit macabre? Are we reverting back to paganism and superstition with this? Ecumenically, this will not fly! All these people who are here for the relics – where are they on Sunday for the Eucharist? Are we placing more faith in the bones of dead saints than in Christ?’ Here I attempt to wrestle with these questions that are not new and to situate the veneration of relics in an important historical context.

Relics in Scripture and Tradition

Anyone looking to Scripture to endorse the cult of relics will end up disappointed. While the Mosaic Law recognised the veneration of the dead as part of Jewish piety (cf. Tob. 1:16-20; 4:3-4), the religious meaning of this practice remains unclear. However, what is evidently clear, particularly from the Old Testament, is the warning against idolising creatures and things in a way that replaces a mature faith in God’s presence and promises. That said, a rare but important reference to relics is found in Acts. While the Apostles in the nascent Church preached the Gospel by word and witness, the new converts at the time of St Paul disputed about objects that belonged to the Apostles and recognised clothing they had touched as miraculous agents (cf. Acts 19:12).

The earliest evidence of the veneration of relics is found in the middle of the second century, with the account of the martyrdom of St Polycarp written about 156 AD. On the death of Polycarp, the body of the saint was not immediately handed over to the Church as a punishment for his defiance of the Emperor and refusal to worship state gods. Interestingly, in the account of his death known as ‘The Martyrdom of Polycarp’, the Roman the magistrate refused to surrender the body of the saint for he did not want to create a new god for Christians to worship. Polycarp’s fellow Christians seized on this error to clarify that while they wanted to honour Polycarp, their faith was in Christ and their worship was due to him alone:

‘Little do they know that it could never be possible for us to abandon the Christ who died for the salvation of every soul that is to be saved in all the world – the Sinless One dying for sinners – or to worship any other. It is to him, as the Son of God, that we give our adoration, while to the martyrs, as disciples and imitators of the Lord, we give the love they have earned by their matchless devotion to their king and teacher’.

Here at the outset, is the clear distinction between honouring the saints of Christ and faith in Christ. When the Christians of Smyrna eventually procured the remains of Polycarp, they underlined the subordination of their veneration by honouring him as a disciple and imitator of Christ.

‘So, after all we did gather up his bones – more precious to us than jewels and finer than pure gold – and we laid them to rest in a spot suitable for the purpose. There we shall assemble, as occasion allows, with glad rejoicings, and with the Lord’s permission we shall celebrate the birthday of his martyrdom’ (The Martyrdom of Polycarp).

Similarly, in early Christian Rome under persecution, Christians took great care and went to great lengths to bury the bodies of the martyrs and venerate their relics as we see, for example, in the Catacombs. These venerations were increasingly associated with a liturgical cult especially after the Edict of Milan in 313 when churches began to be built above the graves of martyrs – the best examples being the Basilica of Constantine over the tomb of St Peter on the Vatican hill and another over the grave of St Paul on the Via Ostiensis. In ancient times, the place where the martyr was buried and the place where the Eucharist was celebrated, tended to merge into one. Here is the origin of the practice of saints’ relics being placed in altars, that finds its justification in Scripture: “I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne” (Rev. 6:9). The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 AD made the same core theological point, namely that venerating icons or relics points to the witness of the saints and does not remain with the material object itself.[1] True veneration always leads to worship of God alone. It is important to note how this connection between the historical witness of the saints and worship of God is retained in contemporary liturgy for as it states in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal: “The practice of the deposition of relics of Saints, even those not Martyrs, under the altar to be dedicated is fittingly retained”.[2]

Despite this balanced approach, reservations about the cult of relics began to appear early on. These anticipated some of the objections that would re-emerge in later centuries. Origen of Alexandria (185 - ca.253) seemed to have regarded the practice of venerating relics as a pagan sign of respect for a material object. Vigilantius of Toulouse (c. 370-410) criticised the basic principles of the cult of relics, claiming it was nothing less that idolatrous adoration. In response, both Eastern and Western Fathers such as Basil, John Chrysostom and Jerome, defended the cult with an appeal to Scripture, Church tradition and the miracles worked by God that were mediated through the relics of the saints. This was also the main justification for the cult offered by Gregory of Nazianzus, Augustine, Paulinus of Nola and Ambrose. Yes, glory is to be given to God alone; but since his power is manifested through the relics of the saints, it is fitting to venerate them.

For St Augustine, the miracles resulting from the veneration of relics was an apologetical tool to establish the credentials of Christianity against paganism.[3] Yet he also saw the need to condemn the unscrupulous who were trafficking in relics that were genuine and those that were counterfeit.[4]

Following the iconoclast controversy in the East, St John Damascene (676-749) taught that God gave the relics of the saints to the Church as a means of salvation. Relics represent the saints and so the cult of relics mediated the saving power of God.

Despite this teaching from the Church Fathers, the cult of relics became increasingly corrupted by dismemberment of bodies of saints, thus leading to both the multiplication of relics and the theft of relics that were deemed valuable. An infamous example was the sacking of Constantinople in 1204 by Crusader armies when relics of the saints were stolen and sent to enrich churches and cathedrals in medieval Europe. As a sign of repentance and reconciliation, the relics of St John Chrysostom and St Gregory of Naziansus were handed back by Pope St John Paul II to Patriarch Bartholomew I in an ecumenical ceremony in St Peter’s Basilica on 27^th November 2004. These abuses were recognised by the Council of Lyon in 1274 that sought to regulate the cult of relics and prohibited the veneration of those relics not approved by the pope.

In the thirteenth century, St Thomas Aquinas taught that as the saints belong to Christ, they are intercessors with God for the living. Since every relic is part of the saints’ sanctified and historical existence, they are tangible signs of the saints who are the direct object of honour. Thomas clarified that while relics in themselves have no sanctifying power, they do “excite to love by signifying the love that is achieved through the relics”.[5] He also insisted that while the saints and their relics deserve veneration, God is the principle and primary object of worship, thus avoiding any semblance of superstitious practice.

The cult of relics came in for harsh criticism from the Reformers. Luther considered the cult of relics as a lucrative invention of the Roman Church and contrary to the Word of God. John Hus considered the practice idolatrous. Their criticisms were justified and fuelled by a cult of relics that had become corrupt with commercialism and exaggerations widespread in the Church at the time.

Part 2 of this article will be posted next week

[1] H. Denzinger – P. Hünermann, eds., Enchiridion Symbolorum: definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum, Bologna, Edizioni Dehoniane, Bologna 2009 (hereafter DS), 302.

[2] GIRM, 302.

[3] See Augustine, City of God, 22, 8.

[4] See Augustine, On the Works of Monks, 28.

[5] STh, 3a, 25.6