Is it ever justified to buy a relic?

[NickVA]

I Know that Canon Law and Church teaching absolutely forbid the buying and selling of 1st and 2nd class relics under pain of the sin of Simony.

However, I was wondering if it is ever considered morally justified to buy an item with great spiritual significance, like a relic to get it out of the hands of those who would not treat it with any respect or reverence.

For instance, Much to my sadness, I read that a consecrated host was sold on Ebay. So, is it ever justified to “buy” the Sacred Host to prevent it from being abused or desecrated.

fatima.org/news/newsviews/pr041505.asp

I know that the end doesn’t justify the means, but some of what goes on is so terrible and needs to be stopped. Obviously the only way to surely stop these people, is to buy the item in question.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Yes, if the intention is to rescue the relic then it is allowed. But a priest who has many relics in his care told me that you shouldn’t take this upon yourself. Let those in the know deal with the rescuing of relics. You may help by reporting such cases to them of people selling relics.

 

[roveau]

Simony has intent behind it for some selfish purpose, for some sort of gain. It usually involves Church property or a desirable position in the Church hierarchy. However, If you are buying a relic at a market or antique store to save it from posssible desecration or from further exploitation for gain, I would say it was a worthy action. The thing to do would be to donate the relic to some Church organization for whom the relic may have some direct relevance.

I saw several reliquaries for sale in the pilgrim town of Kevelaar in Germany. From memory they were 3,000 euros or more. The relic holders were in the shape of monstrances and had fragments of bone strapped to the mid section under glass, with the names of the saints written out in a dark ink. They looked to be about 200 or more years old.

I am almost certain that the sellers (expensive antique shop selling many religious items) which were close to the main pilgrimage churches would argue that they are not selling the relics but the reliquaries… which were works of art in themselves. So, in a way you can buy reliquaries and incidentally obtain relics at the same time. I’m so sorry that I didn’t photograph them because they were in the main front window… I did try to get back there.

On a minor note. You can get third class relics when you buy second hand holy cards in some of the book shops or antique shops in Europe.

 

[Dymphna82]

“Any minute I waited, It could have fallen into the hands of a witch or Satanist. That’s Jesus in the Host!”. It is hoped that the Catholic turned the Host over to a Catholic priest so that It could be reverently consumed. It would also be fitting for EBAY to refund the Catholic gentleman the $2000.00 he paid to rescue the Host.

From my perspective, this is quite possibly a money making gimmick. Who is to say that the person who bought it isn’t a friend of the seller? So then they buy the host, in hopes that Ebay will give them an extra $2000?

It’s the Eucharist. A Wiccan and most Pagans would have absolutely no interest in getting their hands on it. I could see maybe Lady Gaga playing around with it but still…anyone could walk into church, pretend their Catholic and get one.

I thought maybe this story was about something more difficult to obtain, like a saint’s arm or something.

 

[MarkThompson]

I would have to say the answer is no. The prohibition on commerce in relics is an absolute one, and a person who offers to buy a relic suborns and is complicit in the offense. It is never permitted to commit one moral evil in order to prevent another.

 

[Spirithound]

I’m going to weigh in with a maybe, however I would lay that contingent on your knowledge that it is a real relic.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I would have to say the answer is no. The prohibition on commerce in relics is an absolute one, and a person who offers to buy a relic suborns and is complicit in the offense. It is never permitted to commit one moral evil in order to prevent another.

I wouldn’t say its absolute. But as the priest told us in the class at that time that even he wouldn’t try to buy relics to rescue them but instead leave it to a more competent group. I’m sure buying would be a last resort and they would try to talk the owner of the relic to return the relic free of charge. But if the person is non-Catholic and is intent on making a quick buck, that may not be the case.

 

[MarkThompson]

I wouldn’t say its absolute. But as the priest told us in the class at that time that even he wouldn’t try to buy relics to rescue them but instead leave it to a more competent group. I’m sure buying would be a last resort and they would try to talk the owner of the relic to return the relic free of charge. But if the person is non-Catholic and is intent on making a quick buck, that may not be the case.

The Latin word used in the canon is nefas, which means altogether forbidden by divine law. The act of trafficking in relics is itself innately evil; therefore, it cannot be perpetrated in hopes of preventing some other evil.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The Latin word used in the canon is nefas, which means altogether forbidden by divine law. The act of trafficking in relics is itself innately evil; therefore, it cannot be perpetrated in hopes of preventing some other evil.

And yet someone does do this. Perhaps a Papal indult? That is why the priest who were telling us about it says he wouldn’t dare do it himself and leave it to the competent authority. Maybe the competent authority was given Papal exemption for the task?

 

[FaustinaClare]

I’m not sure how true this is but on Pawn Stars the other night on the History Channel a man walked in with a first class relic of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton to pawn off. He stated that he bought it an estate sale of an old priest. I thought those kind of things would go to the Church but I don’t know much about that.

The guy who owns the pawn shop found out that it was wrong to buy relics due to divine law and refused to buy the relic.

I just wonder whatever happened to it since this guy was so eager to sell.

 

[Brendan]

And yet someone does do this. Perhaps a Papal indult? That is why the priest who were telling us about it says he wouldn’t dare do it himself and leave it to the competent authority. Maybe the competent authority was given Papal exemption for the task?

The offer is made for the value of the reliquary, not the relic itself.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m not sure how true this is but on Pawn Stars the other night on the History Channel a man walked in with a first class relic of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton to pawn off. He stated that he bought it an estate sale of an old priest. I thought those kind of things would go to the Church but I don’t know much about that.

The guy who owns the pawn shop found out that it was wrong to buy relics due to divine law and refused to buy the relic.

I just wonder whatever happened to it since this guy was so eager to sell.

A diocesan priest owns his own property and it would normally go to relatives. I guess the priest didn’t leave a will that would have given the relic to a relative or the parish or diocese.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The offer is made for the value of the reliquary, not the relic itself.

This is true when making donations when you are receiving guardianship of a relic. But when someone else gets hold of a relic with intentions of selling it, often the asking price may be more than the actual value of the reliquary.

 

[malphono]

The offer is made for the value of the reliquary, not the relic itself.

Thank you for reiterating that. It needed to be reinjected into this thread.

It’s not very likely that an actual relic would be put up for sale on its own: what use would a non-believer have for it? The only persons who would be interested would be the faithful, who already know (or should) that such an item cannot be sold. The reliquary, however, is, as another poster noted earlier, often considered art in its own right. And there is nothing that says it (the reliquary) cannot be commercially trafficked (although I’d consider even that to be kind of tacky). Whether or not the reliquary contains a relic, the offer of money is made for the reliquary.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Thank you for reiterating that. It needed to be reinjected into this thread.

It’s not very likely that an actual relic would be put up for sale on its own: what use would a non-believer have for it? The only persons who would be interested would be the faithful, who already know (or should) that such an item cannot be sold. The reliquary, however, is, as another poster noted earlier, often considered art in its own right. And there is nothing that says it (the reliquary) cannot be commercially trafficked (although I’d consider even that to be kind of tacky). Whether or not the reliquary contains a relic, the offer of money is made for the reliquary.

Of course some non-believers would know that relics are important to believers. Its like would a piece of cardboard and a piece of cloth glued together would be worth much to most people? Of course not, but to a sports memorabilia collector, its worth hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars to get a trading card with the signature and a piece of game worn cloth by their favorite athlete.

So if the relic falls into the wrong hands, its probably that person would want to make the most money from the people who knows the true (non-monetary) value of the relics.

 

[malphono]

Of course some non-believers would know that relics are important to believers. Its like would a piece of cardboard and a piece of cloth glued together would be worth much to most people? Of course not, but to a sports memorabilia collector, its worth hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars to get a trading card with the signature and a piece of game worn cloth by their favorite athlete.

So if the relic falls into the wrong hands, its probably that person would want to make the most money from the people who knows the true (non-monetary) value of the relics.

No, it’s not like “sports memorabilia” or other collectible junk. The point is, no one of the faithful would pay for the relic. The seller might make a few bucks on the reliquary, but not on the relic itself.

 

[ConstantineTG]

No, it’s not like “sports memorabilia” or other collectible junk. The point is, no one of the faithful would pay for the relic. The seller might make a few bucks on the reliquary, but not on the relic itself.

I’m just saying the will try and probably price it higher. And how can you guarantee that none of the faithful would buy it? Some may not be aware that relics are not to be bought or sold.

 

[malphono]

I’m just saying the will try and probably price it higher. And how can you guarantee that none of the faithful would buy it? Some may not be aware that relics are not to be bought or sold.

To quote Charlie Brown" Oh, good grief! :banghead:

 

[ConstantineTG]

What? I’m giving you real world scenarios here. In a perfect world I’d agree with your, but its not a perfect world out there. These things do happen and are happening.