SECTION II.
Nothing is more characteristic of Rome than the worship of relics.
Wherever a chapel is opened, or a temple consecrated, it cannot be
thoroughly complete without some relic or other of he-saint or she-saint
to give sanctity to it. The relics of the saints and rotten bones of the
martyrs form a great part of the wealth of the Church. The grossest
impostures have been practised in regard to such relics; and the most
drivelling tales have been told of their wonder-working powers, and that
too by Fathers of high name in the records of Christendom. Even
Augustine, with all his philosophical acuteness and zeal against some
forms of false doctrine, was deeply infected with the grovelling spirit
that led to relic worship. Let any one read the stuff with which he
concludes his famous "City of God," and he will in no wise
wonder that Rome has made a saint of him, and set him up for the worship
of her devotees. Take only a specimen or two of the stories with which
he bolsters up the prevalent delusions of his day: "When the
Bishop Projectius brought the relics of St. Stephen to the town called
Aquae Tibiltinae, the people came in great crowds to honour them.
Amongst there was a blind woman, who entreated the people to lead her to
the bishop who had the HOLY RELICS. They did so, and the bishop gave her
some flowers which he had in his hand. She took them, and put them to
her eyes, and immediately her sight was restored, so that she passed
speedily on before all the others, no longer requiring to be
guided." * In Augustine's day, the formal "worship"
of the relics was not yet established; but the martyrs to whom they
were supposed to have belonged where already invoked with prayers and
supplications, and that with the high approval of the Bishop of Hippo,
as the following story will abundantly show: Here, in Hippo, says he,
there was a poor and holy old man, by name Florentius, who obtained a
living by tailoring. This man once lost his coat, and not being able to
purchase another to replace it, he came to the shrine of the Twenty
Martyrs, in this city, and prayed aloud to them, beseeching that they
would enable him to get another garment. A crowd of silly boys who
overheard him, followed him at his departure, scoffing at him,and asking
him whether he had begged fifty pence from the martyrs to buy a coat.
The poor man went silently on towards home, and as he passed near the
sea, he saw a large fish which had been cast up on the sand, and was
still panting. The other persons who were present allowed him to take up
this fish, which he brought to one Catosus, a cook, and a good
Christian, who bought it from him for three hundred pence. With this he
meant to purchase wool, which his wife might spin, and make into a
garment for him. When the cook cut up the fish, he found within its
belly a ring of gold, which his conscience persuaded him to give to the
poor man from whom he brought the fish. He did so, saying, at the same
time, "Behold how the Twenty Martyrs have clothed you!" *
Thus did the great Augustine inculcate the worship of dead men, and the
honouring of their wonder-working relics. The "silly
children" who "scoffed" at the tailor's
prayer seem to have had more sense than either the "holy old
tailor" or the bishop. Now, if men professing Christianity
were thus, in the fifth century, paving the way for the worship of all
manner of rags and rotten bones; in the realms of Heathendom the same
worship had flourished for ages before Christian saints or martyrs had
appeared in the world. In Greece, the superstitions regard to relics,
and especially to the bones of the deified heroes, was a conspicuous
part of the popular idolatry. The work of Pausanias, the learned Grecian
antiquary, is full of reference to this superstition. Thus, of the
shoulder-blade of Pelops, we read that, after passing through divers
adventures, being appointed by the oracle of Delphi, as a divine means
of delivering the Eleans from a pestilence under which they suffered, it
"was committed," as a sacred relic, "to the
custody" of the man who had fished it out of the sea, and of
his posterity after him. * The bones of the Trojan Hector were preserved
as a precious deposit at Thebes. "They" [the
Thebans], says Pausanias, "say that his [Hector's] bones were
brought hither from Troy, in consequence of the following oracle:
'Thebans, who inhabit the city of Cadmus, if you wish to reside in your
country, blest with the possession of blameless wealth, bring the bones
of Hector, the son of Priam, into your dominions from Asia, and
reverence the hero agreeably to the mandate of Jupiter.'" *
Many other similar instances from the same author might be adduced.
The bones thus carefully kept and reverenced were all believed to be
miracle-working bones. From the earliest periods, the system of Buddhism
has been propped up by relics, that have wrought miracles at least as
well vouched as those wrought by the relics of St. Stephen, or by the "Twenty
Martyrs." In the "Mahawanso," one of the
great standards of the Buddhist faith, reference is thus made to the
enshrining of the relics of Buddha: "The vanquisher of foes
having perfected the works to be executed within the relic receptacle.
convening an assembly of the priesthood, thus addressed them: 'The works
that were to be executed by me, in the relic receptacle, are completed.
To-morrow, I shall enshrine the relics. Lords, bear in mind the
relics.'" * Who has not heard of the Holy Coat of Treves, and
its exhibition to the people? From the following, the reader will see
that there was an exactly similar exhibition of the Holy Coat of Buddha:
"Thereupon (the nephew of the Naga Rajah) by his supernatural
gift, springing up into the air to the height of seven palmyra trees,
and stretching out his arm brought to the spot where he was poised, the
Dupathupo (or shrine) in which the DRESS laid aside by Buddho, as Prince
Siddhatto, on his entering the priesthood, was enshrined....and
EXHIBITED IT TO THE PEOPLE." * This "Holy Coat" of
Buddha was no doubt as genuine, and as well entitled to worship, as the "Holy
Coat" of Treves. The resemblance does not stop here. It is
only a year or two ago since the Pope presented to his beloved son,
Francis Joseph of Austria, a "TOOTH" of "St.
Peter," as a mark of his special favour and regard. * The
teeth of Buddha are in equal request among his worshippers. "King
of Devas," said a Buddhist missionary, who was sent to one of
the principal courts of Ceylon to demand a relic or two from the Rajah, "King
of Devas, thou possessest the right canine tooth relic (of Buddha), as
well as the right collar bone of the divine teacher. Lord of Devas,
demur not in matters involving the salvation of the land of Lanka."
* Then the miraculous efficacy of these relics is shown in the
following: "The Saviour of the world (Buddha) even after he had
attained to Parinibanan or final emancipation (i.e., after his death),
by means of a corporeal relic, performed infinite acts to the utmost
perfection, for the spiritual comfort and mundane prosperity of mankind.
While the Vanquisher (Jeyus) yet lived, what must he not have
done?" * Now, in the Asiatic researches, a statement is made
in regard to these relics of Buddha, which marvellously reveals to us
the real origin of this Buddhist relic worship. The statement is this: "The
bones or limbs of Buddha were scattered all over the world, like those
of Osiris and Jupiter Zagreus. To collect them was the first duty of his
descendants and followers, and then to entomb them. Out of filial piety,
the remembrance of this mournful search was yearly kept up by a
fictitious one, with all possible marks of grief and sorrow till a
priest announced that the sacred relics were at last found. This is
practised to this day by several Tartarian tribes of the religion of
Buddha; and the expression of the bones of the Son of the Spirit of
heaven is peculiar to the Chinese and some tribes in Tartary." *
Here, then, it is evident that the worship of relics is just a part of
those ceremonies instituted to commemorate the tragic death of Osiris or
Nimrod, who, as the reader may remember, was divided into fourteen
pieces, which were sent into so many different regions infected by his
apostacy and false worship, to operate in terrorem upon all who might
seek to follow his example. When the apostates regained their power, the
very first thing they did was to seek for these dismembered relics of
the great ringleader in idolatry, and to entomb them with every mark of
devotion. Thus does Plutarch describe the search: "Being
acquainted with this event [viz., the dismemberment of Osiris], Isis set
out once more in search of the scattered embers of her husband's body,
using a boat made of the papyrus rush in order more easily to pass
through the lower and fenny parts of the country.....And one reason
assigned for the different sepulchres of Osiris shown in Egypt is, that
wherever any one of his scattered limbs was discovered she buried it on
the spot; though others suppose that it was owing to an artifice of the
queen, who presented each of those cities with an image of her husband,
in order that, if Typho should overcome Horus in the approaching
contest, he might be unable to find the real sepulchre. Isis succeeded
in recovering all the different members, with the exception of one,
which had been devoured by the Lepidotus, the Phagrus, and the
Oxyrhynchus, for which reason these fish are held in abhorrence by the
Egyptians. To make amends, she consecrated the Phallus, and instituted a
solemn festival to its memory." * Not only does this show the
real origin of relic worship; it shows also that the multiplication of
relics can pretend to the most venerable antiquity. If, therefore, Rome
can boast that she has sixteen or twenty holy coats, seven or eight arms
of St. Matthew, two or three heads of St. Peter, this is nothing more
than Egypt could do in regard to the relics of Osiris. Egypt was covered
with sepulchres of its martyred god; and many a leg and arm and skull,
all vouched to be genuine, were exhibited in the rival burying-places
for the adoration of the Egyptian faithful. Nay, not only were these
Egyptian relics sacred themselves, they CONSECRATED THE VERY GROUND in
which they were entombed. This fact is brought out by Wilkinson, from a
statement of Plutarch: * "The Temple of this deity of Abydos,"
says he, "was also particularly honoured, and so holy was
the place considered by the Egyptians, that persons living at some
distance from it sought, and perhaps with difficulty obtained,
permission to possess a sepulchre within its Necropolis, in order that,
after death, they might repose in GROUND HALLOWED BY THE TOMB of this
great an mysterious deity." * If the places were the relics of
Osiris were buried were accounted peculiarly holy, it is easy to see how
naturally this would give rise to the pilgrimages so frequent among the
heathen. The reader does not heed to be told what merit Rome attaches to
such pilgrimages to the tombs of saints, and how in the Middle Ages, one
of the most favourite ways of washing away sin was to undertake a
pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Jago di Compostella in Spain, or to the
Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. * Now, in the Scripture there is not the
slightest trace of any such thing as a pilgrimage to the tomb of saint,
martyr, prophet, or apostle. The very way in which the Lord saw fit to
dispose of the body of Moses in burying it Himself in the plains of
Moab, so that no man should ever know where his sepulchre was, was
evidently designed to rebuke every such feeling as that from which such
pilgrimages arise. And considering whence Israel had come, the Egyptian
ideas with which they were infected, as shown in the matter of the
golden calf, and the high reverence they must have entertained for
Moses, the wisdom of God in so disposing of his body must be apparent.
In the land where Israel had so long sojourned, there were great and
pompous pilgrimages at certain seasons of the year, and these often
attended with gross excesses. Herodotus tells us, that in his time the
multitude who went annually on pilgrimage to Bubastis amounted to
700,000 individuals, and that then more wine was drunk than at any other
time in the year. * Wilkinson thus refers to a similar pilgrimage to
Philae: "Besides the celebration of the great mysteries which
took place at Philae, a grand ceremony was performed at a particular
time, when the priests, in solemn procession, visited his tomb, and
crowned it with flowers. * Plutarch even pretends that all access to the
island was forbidden at every other period, and that no bird would fly
over it, or fish swim near this CONSECRATED GROUND." * This
seems not to have been a procession merely of the priests in the
immediate neighbourhood of the tomb, but a truly national pilgrimage;
for, says Diodorus, "the sepulchre of Osiris at Philae is
revered by all the priests throughout Egypt." * We have not
the same minute information about the relic worship in Assyria or
Babylon; but we have enough to show that, as it was the Babylonian god
that was worshipped in Egypt under the name of Osiris, so in his own
country there was the same superstitious reverence paid to his relics.
We have seen already, that when the Babylonian Zoroaster died, he was
said voluntarily to have given his life as a sacrifice, and to have
"charged his countrymen to preserve his remains," assuring
them that on the observance or neglect of this dying command, the fate
of their empire would hinge. * And, accordingly, we learn from Ovid,
that the "Busta Nini," or "Tomb of Ninus,"
long ages thereafter, was one of the monuments of Babylon. * Now, in
comparing the death and fabled resurrection of the false Messiah with
the death and resurrection of the true, when he actually appeared, it
will be found that there is a very remarkable contrast. When the false
Messiah died, limb was severed from limb, and his bones were scattered
over the country. When the death of the true Messiah took place,
Providence so arranged it that the body should be kept entire, and that
the prophetic word should be exactly fulfilled--"a bone of Him
shall not be broken." When, again, the false Messiah was
pretended to have had a resurrection, that resurrection was in a new
body, while the old body, with all its members, was left behind, thereby
showing that the resurrection was nothing but a pretence and a sham.
When, however, the true Messiah was "declared to be the Son of
God with power, by the resurrection from the dead," the tomb,
though jealously watched by the armed unbelieving soldiery of Rome, was
found to be absolutely empty, and no dead body of the Lord was ever
afterwards found, or even pretended to have been found. The resurrection
of Christ, therefore, stands on a very different footing from the
resurrection of Osiris. Of the body of Christ, of course, in the nature
of the case, there could be no relics. Rome, however, to carry out the
Babylonian system, has supplied the deficiency by means of the relics of
the saints; and now the relics of St. Peter and St. Paul, of St. Thomas
A'Beckett and St. Lawrence O'Toole, occupy the very same place in the
worship of the Papacy as the relics of Osiris in Egypt, or of Zoroaster
in Babylon.
[ Back ] [ Up ] [ Next ]
|
