5 ms·

If you're referring to relics in the Catholic sense of the remains or possessions of canonized saints being "fake" then there's probably an element of truth to

If you're referring to relics in the Catholic sense of the remains or possessions of canonized saints being "fake" then there's probably an element of truth to many (most? not sure...) in that they likely were at a time fabricated. However, this core belief in them being real and the history surrounding them still makes them historically significant so it's hard to understand what value there is in claiming them as fake in this context. Is the Shroud of Turin the real shroud used to wrap Jesus at his burial? Pretty much certainly not. That said, it is still clearly historically significant. Now, if more broadly you are referring to relics in the generic sense of objects of historical importance surviving from times long ago, then it seems obvious that most Christian relics are NOT fakes. Christianity has a long, deep history that has influenced the creation of massive amounts of art, literature, architecture, pottery, etc.

Dahoon 7y ago
>Is the Shroud of Turin the real shroud used to wrap Jesus at his burial? Pretty much certainly not. That said, it is still clearly historically significant. Clearly it is not something worthy of a museum then. A fake thing being old doesn't make it historically significant for a museum. A church, maybe.
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  Relics are important for understanding the medieval period's interwoven trade and pilgrimage. No relics? less travel? Slower "flatten the curve" back plague? Smaller renaissance? Weaker atheism today? :O
- creddit 7y ago
  No one said fake + old = museum worthy. There's far more to the Shroud of Turin's history that makes it museum worthy.
justinator 7y ago
Christianity has a long, deep history that has influenced the creation of massive amounts of art, literature, architecture, pottery, etc. Unfortunately I tend to focus on the atrocities that have happened in history in the name of the religion itself. Perhaps that would make a good topic to build a museum about.
wpietri 7y ago
The value in pointing out their fakeness is to make sure people don't get misled about their realness. People are still trying hard to prove the Shroud of Turin real [1], and until that's a dead argument, we should always be clear about the truth. I do agree that it's worth keeping the fakes, though. If the Museum of The Bible were bigger on "museum" than "bible" this would be a great centerpiece for an exhibit on the long history of profitable religious forgeries. [1] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/researchers-hung-men-cross-and-added-blood-bid-prove-turin-shroud-real https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/researchers-hung-men...
antognini 7y ago
It's a little known fact, but the altar in every Catholic church contains relics of a saint. But almost all of them contain relics from relatively modern saints, not the bones of St. Peter or something.
- majos 7y ago
  The relics business is way more organized than I thought. There are technically three classes of relics, first (actual remnant of a saint), second (remnant of object belonging to saint) or third (touched a first class relic or a saint’s tomb) [1]. So technically it’s always possible to manufacture more relics. [1] https://m.ncregister.com/blog/smcafee/i-made-a-third-class-relic-of-st.-dominicheres-how https://m.ncregister.com/blog/smcafee/i-made-a-third-class-r...

Dahoon 7y ago

>Is the Shroud of Turin the real shroud used to wrap Jesus at his burial? Pretty much certainly not. That said, it is still clearly historically significant. Clearly it is not something worthy of a museum then. A fake thing being old doesn't make it historically significant for a museum. A church, maybe.

Ericson2314 7y ago
Relics are important for understanding the medieval period's interwoven trade and pilgrimage. No relics? less travel? Slower "flatten the curve" back plague? Smaller renaissance? Weaker atheism today? :O
creddit 7y ago
No one said fake + old = museum worthy. There's far more to the Shroud of Turin's history that makes it museum worthy.

justinator 7y ago

Christianity has a long, deep history that has influenced the creation of massive amounts of art, literature, architecture, pottery, etc. Unfortunately I tend to focus on the atrocities that have happened in history in the name of the religion itself. Perhaps that would make a good topic to build a museum about.

wpietri 7y ago

The value in pointing out their fakeness is to make sure people don't get misled about their realness. People are still trying hard to prove the Shroud of Turin real [1], and until that's a dead argument, we should always be clear about the truth. I do agree that it's worth keeping the fakes, though. If the Museum of The Bible were bigger on "museum" than "bible" this would be a great centerpiece for an exhibit on the long history of profitable religious forgeries. [1] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/researchers-hung-men-cross-and-added-blood-bid-prove-turin-shroud-real https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/researchers-hung-men...

antognini 7y ago

It's a little known fact, but the altar in every Catholic church contains relics of a saint. But almost all of them contain relics from relatively modern saints, not the bones of St. Peter or something.

majos 7y ago
The relics business is way more organized than I thought. There are technically three classes of relics, first (actual remnant of a saint), second (remnant of object belonging to saint) or third (touched a first class relic or a saint’s tomb) [1]. So technically it’s always possible to manufacture more relics. [1] https://m.ncregister.com/blog/smcafee/i-made-a-third-class-relic-of-st.-dominicheres-how https://m.ncregister.com/blog/smcafee/i-made-a-third-class-r...