third class relics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leon_Bloy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Leon_Bloy

Guest
Some people like to make their own third-class relics by touching a piece of cloth, or a medal, rosary, etc. to the tomb of a saint (at least to the outside of the stone or glass, etc. in which the saint’s body reposes, at least - which is just as good).

Of those of you who do this, what is your opinion on being able to make a third-class relic from just a reliquary that contains a tiny first-class relic? I have become of the opinion that this counts, too, but any thoughts? I know there is probably not a definitive answer out there anyplace, since the Church only really speaks officially about first and second-class. The rest of it is kind of up to the personal piety of the us people.
 
Last month, we had an exhibit of 150 relics (in reliquaries) tour our archdiocese. Before seeing the relics, Father Carlos Martins, the curator/caretaker, gave a lecture. He told us the rosaries, medals, prayer cards, etc, we touch to the reliquaries do become 3rd class relics. He also said, “Sorry, your hands don’t became 3rd class relics.”
 
So the reliquaries themselves are first-class relics? A third-class is something that’s been touched to a first-class.
 
svid2 said:
So the reliquaries themselves are first-class relics? A third-class is something that’s been touched to a first-class.
Click to expand...
Yes, asia meant that the 150 reliquaries contained first-class relics.
 
A fourth-class is anything I brought back from Paris. They’re not for sale.
 
Yeah, I guess if the relicizing (sic) things depends on physical contact, then the reliquaries are actually third class relics and touching something to them won’t work. If it’s dependent on proximity and intention then that’s another thing.

Which makes me wonder, because I tried the whole touch-it-to-the-reliquaries thing with one of my rosaries and now I’m not sure if it’s a third class relic or not. And then there’s the question of whether an object can only be the relic of one saint at a time or not.

Although I CAN tell you that I certainly got zapped while holding a reliquary with a first class-er of St. Dymphna in it. I wasn’t healed of anything though 😦
 
asia53 said:
Last month, we had an exhibit of 150 relics (in reliquaries) tour our archdiocese. Before seeing the relics, Father Carlos Martins, the curator/caretaker, gave a lecture. He told us the rosaries, medals, prayer cards, etc, we touch to the reliquaries do become 3rd class relics. He also said, “Sorry, your hands don’t became 3rd class relics.”
Click to expand...
This is actually not correct.
A third class relic is an item touched to a first class relic. This is traditionally how an item became a third class relic and this was confirmed by some older priests who said that was what they were taught.
The problem is that the Church officially does not define a third class relic (no Church document) so many people (including priests) are basically taking liberties and expanding the unofficial definition to include all sorts of things like those you commented on, and also touching their shrine, or even the location a saint once frequented. Now if a person wants to believe they really have a third class relic under these circumstances there is nothing official against that but bear in mind that traditionally a third class relic is an item touched to a first class relic (not even a second class relic). However in such circumstances we are just kidding ourselves (in my opinion).
There is no such thing as a 4th class relic but I see some people talking about it. What’s next??!!

Not Church documents but well known and often referred to books:

Father Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary:

RELIC. An object connected with a saint, e.g., part of the body or clothing or something the person had used or touched. Authentic relics are venerated with the Church’s warm approbation. They may not be bought or sold. Those of a martyr are placed in the altar stone at the consecration of an altar. Relics are of three classes: the first is part of the saint’s body and is the type placed in the altar stone; the second is part of the clothing or anything used during the saint’s life; and** the third is any other object, such as a piece of cloth, that has been touched to a first-class relic.** (Etym. Latin reliquiae, remains.)

Catholic Encyclopedia (printed edition):

There are three classes of relics: the first is part of the saint’s body and is the type placed in the altar stone; the second is part of the clothing or anything used during the saint’s life; the third is any other object, such as a piece of cloth that has been touched to a first class relic.
 
Hi
I always considered a “fourth class relic” to be an unofficial thing by definition. For me it is a fourth class if it meets the following criteria:
  1. It has been validly blessed and attained the status of sacramental (rosary, crucifix, etc.)
    1a it is that item which the original owner was known for using in devotion. (ie that rosary that aunt Stella was “always seen” praying with).
  2. The original owner lived a strong life of wanting to be in communion with the Church and
    our Lord
  3. The owner is deceased and the item has passed on to another owner.
 
Let me say first of all I am 100% “orthodox” and obedient to all the Church’s teachings absolutely. Just to get that out there before the following. 😉

So: I think one poster here is - with respect (no offense) - being perhaps a little rigid about the definition of a third class relic. As that poster indicated, there is no hard-and-fast rule about third class relics defined by the Church. In, fact, to speak in a certain sense, “officially,” there is no such category as a third-class relic. And yet, Catholics have them, and make them, and this is encouraged by the Church. But how to define one? The Church does not really offer a definition for those.

There have been instances of miracle cures actually used for canonization causes that involved (to paraphrase, so to speak, here) a person touching a sick person with only so much as a flower petal from a plant that had been standing next to a saint’s tomb.

Making a third-class relic also has to do with intention. If I have the bone of a saint exposed in front of me in a church, and I reach down to touch my rosary to it, and then my sleeve accidentally, unknown to me, brushes against the bone, is my sleeve a relic, too? No. This is what I mean.

Those who believe they have third-class relics, having touched things to the reliquaries containing first-class relics are, I’m sure, in perfectly solid territory. Remember, people in the Acts of the Apostles were cured by the shadow of apostles falling over them. The woman with the hemorrhage in the gospel was cured by touching Jesus’ cloak. Those had to do with intention, too. I hope my point makes sense.
 
sulkow82 said:
Hi
I always considered a “fourth class relic” to be an unofficial thing by definition. For me it is a fourth class if it meets the following criteria:
  1. It has been validly blessed and attained the status of sacramental (rosary, crucifix, etc.)
    1a it is that item which the original owner was known for using in devotion. (ie that rosary that aunt Stella was “always seen” praying with).
  2. The original owner lived a strong life of wanting to be in communion with the Church and
    our Lord
  3. The owner is deceased and the item has passed on to another owner.
Click to expand...
We can debate till the cows come home what constitutes a third class relic but no need to do that for a fourth class relic because such a thing does NOT exist.
 
thistle said:
We can debate till the cows come home what constitutes a third class relic but no need to do that for a fourth class relic because such a thing does NOT exist.
Click to expand...
Just as there is no authority governing third and fourth class relics, one cannot really say they do not exist, either… nobody is prohibited from deciding they exist, or making them or using them devoutly. Sacramentals, after all, are things that help dispose a person to receive God’s grace and remind them of holy things… so what is wrong with that? And - it is a convenient way of describing objects that have touched second-class relics.
 
Leon_Bloy said:
Just as there is no authority governing third and fourth class relics, one cannot really say they do not exist, either… nobody is prohibited from deciding they exist, or making them or using them devoutly. Sacramentals, after all, are things that help dispose a person to receive God’s grace and remind them of holy things… so what is wrong with that? And - it is a convenient way of describing objects that have touched second-class relics.
Click to expand...
Convenience does not mean it is not still making a mockery of relics. How many classes do we end up having. It is completely demeaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top