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.