I found their site via a link in a CAF member’s post. Seems like a good site, but I’m wondering if anyone’s ordered from them? I’m wondering specifically how they can offer so many sacramentals that have each been touched to so many first-class relics? Aren’t first-class relics really hard to come by?
There is nothing, therefore, in Catholic teaching to justify the statement that the Church encourages belief in a magical virtue, or physical curative efficacy residing in the relic itself. It may be admitted that St. Cyril of Jerusalem (A.D. 347), and a few other patristic and medieval writers, apparently speak of some power inherent in the relic. For example, St. Cyril, after referring to the miracle wrought by the body of Eliseus, declares that the restoration to life of the corpse with which it was in contact took place “to show that even though the soul is not present a virtue resides in the body of the saints, because of the righteous soul which has for so many years tenanted it and used it as its minister”. And he adds, “Let us not be foolishly incredulous as though the thing had not happened, for if handkerchiefs and aprons which are from without, touching the body of the diseased, have raised up the sick, how much more should the body itself of the Prophet raise the dead?” (Cat., xviii, 16.) But this seems rather to belong to the personal view or manner of speech of St. Cyril. He regards the chrism after its consecration “as no longer simple ointment but the gift of Christ, and by the presence of His Godhead it causes in us the Holy Ghost” (Cat., xxi, 3); and, what is more striking, he also declares that the meats consecrated to idols, “though in their own nature plain and simple, become profane by the invocation of the evil spirit” (Cat.,)(ix, 7)—all of which must leave us very doubtful as to his real belief in any physical virtue inherent in relics. Be this as it may, it is certain that **the Church, with, regard to the veneration of relics, has defined nothing more than what was stated above. Neither has the Church ever pronounced that any particular relic, not even that commonly venerated as the wood of the Cross, is authentic; but she approves of honor being paid to those relics which with reasonable probability are believed to be genuine, and which are invested with due ecclesiastical sanctions. **
You will have to ask a Church investigator. I have no idea what the process is for investigating a relic.
I was simply replying to the poster who said their parish has a first class relic of the true cross and as you can see the Church has not pronounced the so-called true cross relics authentic.
I go to a monastery for Mass and they have lots and lots of relics. One of them is St. Francis Xavier’s stole. That is very cool.
I always think of this story when I think of relics: A woman asked her parish priest if it was true that anything that was touched to a relic becomes a relic. The priest said, yes if something is touched to a first class relic it becomes a third class relic. The woman said; “well then Father, I was once spanked by Mother Cabrini”
That phrase means that the Church does not see anything wrong with venerating relics. And, I’m imagining that “invested with due ecclesiastical sanctions” permits things like processions with relics, public veneration of relics, and permits the reception of indulgences with certain relics.