Revered relic of the Nativity heads back to Bethlehem

[Victoria33]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...heads-back-to-bethlehem/ar-BBXvwdH?li=BBnbfcL

The relic, housed in Rome since the seventh century, was presented to the Franciscan custodians of the Holy Land at a mass in the Notre Dame Catholic centre opposite the walls of Jerusalem’s Old city.

I never knew about this. And I know some of us have heard about wood from the cross of Christ and maybe even nails too. Yes, I’m a natural skeptic and wonder about these but I love the stories of course, all the same.

This excerpt is interesting too, who asked for this to be returned? Anyone know? The article says:

- Palestinian request -

During a visit to the Vatican for Middle East peace talks in December 2018, Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas asked Pope Francis to repatriate the crib fragment and his request was granted, said Palestinian envoy to the Holy See, Issa Kassissieh.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m curious about this part:

“This is the first time that a the wooden part of the manger comes back,” Patton added.

“Of course not the entire wooden structure because it is very fragile and it is impossible to transport from Rome to here.”

Sounds like Rome has plenty of wooden manger left to make a new relic for veneration there…

 

[GiftofMercy]

Sounds like Rome has plenty of wooden manger left to make a new relic for veneration there

I dont get that at all out of this from the article

The chief custodian for the Holy Land, Francesco Patton, said that the relic was sent from Bethlehem to Rome around the year 640 as gift to Pope Theodore I from Sophronius, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Patton went on to say l presumably , this seemingly orphaned Quote

“Of course not the entire wooden structure because it is very fragile and it is impossible to transport from Rome to here.”

However there is only ever mention of a relic from the manger being sent to Rome, not any more of the cradle itself.

Instead we get this quote from Patton

Now, over a thousand years later it is returning to the city where it will be installed “forever” in Saint Catherine’s church, adjoining the Basilica of the Nativity, he said.

The relic, not part of the relic.

I am sure @Victoria33 can supersleuth this for accuracy and precision,

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Victoria doesn’t need to “sleuth” anything for “accuracy and precision”. It’s not like she posted an inaccurate article, and it appears that you are the one taking quotations out of context. It’s pretty clear that more than just this little relic was sent to Rome originally.

Googling quickly brings up this statement,which is in Crux and a whole bunch of newspaper articles:

A wooden structure that Christians believe was part of the manger was sent by St. Sophronius, the patriarch of Jerusalem, to Pope Theodore I in the 640s, around the time of the Muslim conquest of the Holy Land.

Vatican returns relic from Jesus’ manger to Holy Land

Christians on Friday celebrated the return to the Holy Land of a tiny wooden relic they believe was part of Jesus’ manger nearly 1,400 years after it was sent to Rome as a gift to the pope.

cruxnow.com

And here’s the rest of the manger slats, in a crystal reliquary in St. Mary Major.

Bethlehem’s manger in Rome

This article outlines the history of how Our Lord's manger was brought to Rome where it is preserved in a precious reliquary in St Mary Majors Basilica

www.mdrevelation.org

So, Rome has still got plenty of manger left for pilgrims to see.

 

[GiftofMercy]

So, Rome has still got plenty of manger left for pilgrims to see.

Unfortunately, ‘informative’ as they are,
Neither of these articles discuss the extent of the relic. There is absolutely no mention of amount , and no photo of the relic with any scale for comparison. There is also no mention in any of the historical documents .
All we have is still ‘the relic was sent’ and ‘the relic’ is being sent back.

As stated earlier, Victoria would super sleuth through web information in an attempt to find out from original sources if she were so inclined. Victoria knows the media. And it would be a task to wade through rumour mills, myth, legend, to determine any truth in the historical accuracy of any alleged ’ cradle’ relic.

I love these stories too, However, I am a sceptic, considering the cradle was a manger, it may well have been hewn from stone, Jesus and His family fled shortly after His birth to Egypt, Roman soldiers were out to kill all the babies and no doubt destroyed a lot of Bethlehem’s creches in the process, and if anything was left, who might have recognised the right manger as that of God’s.

It took several hundred years , and a saintly queen to pilgrimage to The Holy Land and look for artefacts in material goods and sites of Jesus.

 

[Pnwcatholic]

How does one go about priving that these pieces of wood are the manger?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I would imagine that there are historical records of things like the manger, the true cross etc and how the people who found them and brought them to Rome or wherever had decisively decided they were the manger, the true cross etc.

Whether you want to believe them or not is something else again. We take a lot on faith.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It’s honestly not that important to me whether it is a real relic of the real manger, or the one next to it or whatever. One can see the sites of Jesus’ birth and crucifixion if one is so inclined. Even then I understand the spot venerated as the spot of the crucifixion is not the exact spot as the cross was allegedly several feet away from that spot.
But as someone else said to me, “The whole rock is where it happened, and you’re on it.”

Relics that are so old we are not sure of their provenance are mostly just an interesting thing to see, and if one prays before them it’s with the logical understanding that we have no way of knowing whether that is the exact piece of wood, but we are paying homage to the idea that Christ was born in the first place.

Yes it’s fine to be skeptical, no one makes anyone venerate old relics. Still, it seems like the Franciscans in Bethlehem are happy to have the one they received.

 

[Pnwcatholic]

Thanks for taking the time to explain that. I dont mind when people believe certain things but to make claims that cannot be proven and then get upset when someone asks about them seems disingenuous.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

As Catholics, we do not worship anyone or anything but but God and we certainly don’t worship any relic. We can choose to venerate relics of saints and of things associated with Jesus. That is significantly different from worshipping.

As for whatever the Japanese martyrs were being ordered to worship, it clearly wasn’t a relic in the Catholic definition of the word, as it had nothing to do with Jesus Christ or a saint. And it clearly wasn’t Catholic authorities making them do this. When I say “no one makes anyone venerate relics” I am speaking of Catholics and Catholic practice, not including in the group any other religions or pagans or whatever.