New Zealand THURSDAY, APRIL 2.1, 1910. A QUESTION OF RELICS

New Zealand Tablet, 21 April 1910, Page 621

New Zealand THURSDAY, APRIL 2.1, 1910. A QUESTION OF RELICS

CERTAIN class of controversialists—happily they are becoming rarer—are well hit off in Lessing’s Fable of the Poodle and Greyhound. .How our race is degenerated in this country I’ said one day a far-travelled poodle to his friend the greyhound. ‘ln those distant regions men call the Indies, there is still the genuine breed of hounds— my brother (you will not believe it, and yet I have seen it with my own eyes) who do not fear to attack the lion and grapple with him.’ ‘Do they overcome him asked the prudent greyhound. ' Overcome him I- Why, as to that I cannot exactly say; but only think, a lion attacked!’ ‘ But,’ continued the greyhound, ‘if these boasted hounds of yours do not overcome the lion when they attack him, they are no better than we, but; a great • deal more stupid.’, Only think,’ says-Brownson, commenting on the story, ‘the Church attacked! Attack her boldly, with or without success, and you are sure of the admiration of all — poodles.’ It is a controversialist of this sort who, writing over the pseudonym of AntiSuperstition,’ has —somewhat unexpectedly—accorded the hospitality of the correspondence columns of the West-. j)oit A ews. Dealt with on its merits, the production in question would be treated with unqualified contempt. It is anonymous it violates every canon of. good manners and good taste—and in parts it is disgustingly coarse. But it has been sent to us by a highly, esteemed correspondent, who, in common doubtless with others, feels pained at seeing his faith wantonly and coarsely attacked. Under the circumstances, a gentle castigation ■».* of this controversial poodle ’ may do a little good all round. * The main point of the letter is an attack on the Catholic doctrine and practice regarding the veneration of olios or, rather, on what the writer ignorantly imagines to be the Catholic doctrine. ‘Anti-Superstition ’is uneasy in what he calls his mind because, according to the cable a Cardinal Nava, during the recent eruption at Mount Etna, carried the veil of St. Agatha in a religious procession.. This is twisted by ‘ Anti-Superstition ’ into a statement that the Cardinal had gone out ‘ hoping to stop the mighty outpouring of , that Italian volcano ’ with a woman’s veil. The Westport climate must have some subtle, softening influence on the brain if ‘Anti-Supersti-tion,’ or anyone else in that hospitable community, could really bring themselves to believe that Cardinal Nava for a moment supposed that either the veil or the saint could of themselves, apart' from Divine action, do anything whatever to stop the eruption. In this connection ‘AntiSuperstition’ reminds us of an incident which is reported as having taken place not long ago in Mile End Road in was invoked. A pork-butcher’s cart ran into a tramcar! When tho two vehicles got clear of each other the car driver, looking up, exclaimed, ‘Say, Mr. Dripping and Lard, why don’t you ,go and get your ’ead examined by Orsley?’ ‘Well,’ retorts Dripping and Lard, and what do you suppose ’d vbe Victor’s- die-hog-nosis ?’ • ‘Why, ; ’Orsley ’u’d. examine your ’ead and ’e’d say, “ You didn’t ought to come to me with your ’ead, because our Empire has got institootioiis for cases like yours.”’ If ‘AntiSuperstition’ really believes that Cardinal Nava or any

other Catholic imagines that an inanimate object, such as a veil, could, in and of itself, avert a great disaster, his friends ought to inform him without delay that ‘ our Empire has got institutions for cases like his. » So far from authorising or sanctioning such superstition, the Catholic Church strictly and expressly forbids it. Thus, in her catechism for children used in Catholic schools throughout the worldshe teaches the child as follows: Q. Are we forbidden to honor the saints? A. We are not forbidden to honor the saints, if we only honor them as God’s special friends and faithful servants, and if we do not give them supreme or divine honor, which belongs to God alone. Q. Do Catholics distinguish between the honor they give to God and the honor they give to the saints when they pray to God and the saints? A. Catholics distinguish between the honor they give to God and the honor they give to the saints: for.of God alone they beg grace and mercy, and of the saints they only ask the assistance of their prayers. Q. Is it lawful to recommend ourselves to the saints, and to ask their prayers? A. It is lawful to recommend ourselves to the saints, and to ask their prayers, as it is lawful, and a very pious practice, to ask the prayers of our fellow-creatures on earth and to pray for them.’ So much for the saints; now as to their relics. ‘Q. Why do Catholics honor the relics of the saints? A. Catholics honor the relics of the saints, because their bodies were the temples of the Holy Ghost, and will be honored at the last day and will be glorified for ever in heaven. Q. Are we then to pray to the images and relics of the saints? A. Wo are not to pray to the images and relics of the saints; for they have neither life nor sense, nor power to hear or help us.’ That is the belief of Catholics everywhere— by young and old alike. If, instead of advertising his ignorance in the daily papers every time he comes across a Catholic practice which he does not understand, ‘ AntiSuperstition ’ would invest in a penny catechism it would add both to his knowledge and to his humility. One of the common ways by which it is , usual to honor relics is to have them carried in religious procession. In the case under discussion, assuming the cable to be correct, the veil of St. Agatha — was born in the neighborhood of Etna, and whose prayers it has long been customary to invoke in time of such disasters—was so carried. * To the very plain and clear catechism statement — quoted above — to what Catholics do, and do not, believe regarding relics, it is only necessary to add that Catholics believe also that it having pleased God in the past to make use of such objects as instruments for performing great works, and imparting great benefits to His people, they are to be treated with respect, and with an humble hope, that as God has been pleased often to employ them, so Ho may again. It is to be noted that the benefit conferred is referred wholly to God, so that the idea, of superstition is absolutely excluded. Now, wo do find that God has made use of such instruments before. Passing over —owing to considerations of space —the weighty, and indeed overwhelming, testimony of the Fathers, we confine ourselves for the present to the clear and unmistakable Scripture evidence on the question. And in order to leave sceptical Protestants without a loop-hole of escape, our quotations shall be from their own Authorised Version of the Bible. In the Old Law, God raised up a dead man, by his coming in contact with the —relics—-of one of his prophets. 2 Kings, 13th chap., 21st verse, says: ‘And when the man was let down and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived and stood up on his feet.’ What did God thereby show, but that the bones of His saints were sometimes gifted by Him with a supernatural power. We read that a woman was cured who merely touched the hem of our Saviour’s garment, without His exercising any act of His will. Matt. 9th chap., 20th and 22nd verses: ‘And she touched the hem of His garment . . . and the woman was made whole from that hour.’ We read, again, that healing virtue was bestowed even by the shadow of St. Peter. Acts, sth chap., 15th and 16th verses: ‘lnsomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by, might overshadow some of them.’ Had our Westport wiseacre been present on the occasion he would, no doubt, have brayed out Superstition ’ ! Nevertheless, referring to the whole multitude of the sick who came to the apostles, verse 16 says: ‘And they were healed every one.’ Finally, we read, that upon handkerchiefs which had touched the body of St. Paul, being taken to" the sick, the latter were instantly restored to health. Acts, 19th chap., 11th and 12th verses; ‘And God wrought special miracles by the hand of Paul, so that from his body were brought unto the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.’ These examples prove, beyond all possible question, that it has pleased God to make use

of the relics of His saints as instruments for His greatest wonders. Here is the foundation of Catholic faith and Catholic practice. We have the express authority of God, that He has chosen, in the past, to make use of these means: and consequently, there can he no superstition in the belief that Me may use them so again. * :.y ■ ■ The authorised teaching and practice of the Church then, with regard to relics, is simple, reasonable, and absolutely Scriptural. We are asked,’ says the Westport writer, to believe that a high dignitary of the Church, a Cardinal no less, one who may yet be Pope and claim the allegiance of millions of people, has gone out with a woman’s veil and hopes to stop the mighty outpouring of that Italian volcano. Not so. We are asked to believe, as St. James (1 rotestant version) puts it, ‘that the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man ’-—or woman ‘ availeth much and that the means which God has used in the past to perroi m onders and confer benefits, He can and may use today. After a letter full of wild and foolish writing, the \v estport scribe strikes the inevitable pious vein. c I know I voice the sentiment of all Christians when I say that had Cardinal Nava gone out in faith and with prayer to supplicate the Divine Mercy, and to ask for a cessation of the ruin and disaster caused by the volcanic eruption, he would have been joined in that prayer by everyone.’ Anti-Superstition ’ may make his mind quite easy. If Cardinal Nava went out at all, nothing is more certain than that he and his fellow-Catholics went out in precisely the spn it described, and in no other. In conclusion, the next time Anti-Superstition’ sets out to wantonly attack the leligious beliefs of any section of his fellow-citizens, we suggest that he should take his courage in both hands' and sign Ins name. The man who conceals his features by a mask, and shoots frem behind a hedge, is a fairly frequent character, but he has never yet succeeded in getting the world to respect him. °