7. Relics and pilgrimage

Introduction
The relics (from the Latin term reliquiae) are material remains (bones or objects) belonging to one human being considered as a holy figure. They have always played a major role in Christian piety, in former and present times, including nowadays among the Orthodox and the Catholics. Relics are expected to provide some benefits and they are a source of devotion and of important pilgrimages. They also play a significant role in the prestige of a city or a region, and they have been traded, transferred (translated) and even stolen. Despite abuse and criticism, some relics are still at the heart of major pilgrimages.
Source 1

Travels of Egeria

TheTravels of Egeria describe one of the very first pilgrimage routes that we know about. The text was written in Latin, in 384 (according to data provided in the narrative), by a woman named Egeria, who is not mentioned anywhere else in the literature of the time. One could think that she was a nun, but this hypothesis is difficult to confirm. Her narrative is a testimony of the major pilgrimage sites visited in the 4th century, and also shows how a Christian geography was building up, including through the (sometimes incorrect) identification between the places visited and those mentioned in Biblical writings.
The “Arabia” mentioned by Egeria was also the name of a metropolis in Roman times, but its identification remains a problem. The “Taphnis” she mentioned is the Daphnae of ancient times; Egeria was mistaken in believing that she reached the Biblical Taphnis. “Helia”, the name of Jerusalem at the time, comes from the administrative name Aelia Capitolina, which was given to Jerusalem since Hadrian rebuilt it after the second Jewish revolt in 132-135.

Setting out thence [= from Arabia] we pursued our journey continuously through the land of Goshen, among vines that yield wine and vines that yield balsam […] our whole route lying along the bank of the river Nile [= the Pelusiac branch of the Nile] among oft-recurring estates, which were once the homesteads of the children of Israel. And why should I say more? for I think that I have never seen a more beautiful country than the land of Goshen. And travelling thus for two days from the city of Arabia through the land of Goshen continuously, we arrived at Tanis, the city where holy Moses was born. This city of Tatnis was once Pharaoh's metropolis. Now although I had already known these places — as I said above — when I had been at Alexandria and in the Thebaid, yet I wished to learn thoroughly all the places through which the children of Israel marched on their journey from Rameses to Sinai, the holy mountain of God; this made it necessary to return to the land of Goshen and thence to Tanis. We set out from Tanis and, walking along the route that was already known to me, I came to Pelusium. Thence I set out again, and journeying through all those stations in Egypt through which we had travelled before, I arrived at the boundary of Palestine. Thence in the Name of Christ our God I passed through several stations in Palestine and returned to Aelia, that is Jerusalem.

[ENG] The Pilgrimage of Etheria, trans. M. L. McClure and C. L. Feltoe, 1919.

Source 2

Translation of Saint Stephen’s relics

This tapestry was commissioned by the Bishop John III Baillet for the choir of the Cathedral of Auxerre, in France, and woven in the 1500s. It recounts the life of St. Stephen in 23 scenes, until the translation of his body. Stephen was one of the first seven deacons of Jerusalem, considered as the first Christian martyr: he was stoned to death after his violent speech against the Sanhedrin. His body is said to have been discovered in 415 and, later on, carried to Constantinople before being translated to Rome. The tapestry is inspired from both the Apostle Acts and The Golden Legend by Jacobus of Voragine. Written in the 13th century, The Golden Legend holds many stories about saints, and had great success in the Christian world. The narrative is summarized in French on the band under each scene. The excerpts shown here are the scenes 19-22.
In scene 19: In the background, Eudoxia Licinia, possessed by the devil, is in a trance in front of her terrified father, the Eastern Roman Emperor Theodosius II (408-450, wrongly considered as the Western Roman Emperor in the legend). The devil speaks within her body, telling he would get out only if the body of Stephen is carried to Rome in exchange for the one of Lawrence. Lawrence was the first of the seven deacons of Rome, and was also martyred. (From the beginnings of Christianity, the exchanges of relics were frequent.) In the foreground, on the right, the Emperor is accompanied by the Bishop of Rome, recognizable by his tiara with a triple crown and by his red mantum embossed with gold (an anachronism if we focus on the date of the facts instead of the date of the tapestry). They send their emissaries, a legate of the bishop (dressed in red, as a cardinal) and two lay people, to Constantinople.
In scene 20: In the foreground, the Bishop of Rome on the left and the Emperor on the right welcome the saint's body before taking it to the Church Saint-Pierre aux Liens (meaning “St. Peter with Ties”). The body (not shown) lies down in the background, in the canopy surrounded by the previous three emissaries. A crowd has gathered on both sides.
In scene 21: This scene takes place in the Church of St. Peter, in which Stephen’s body is now lying down. In the presence of her father (behind her, without a crown) and of the Bishop of Rome (at the centre, with his tiara and his hands clasped), Eudoxia is again in a trance, expressing out a second message: "May Stephen’s body rest alongside the one of Lawrence outside the walls.”
In scene 22: In the background, we see the tomb holding Lawrence’s body. The Greeks, who were about to grab his body to carry it to Constantinople, are miraculously thrown down to the ground. Thus Rome is blessed with two saints instead of one, and a “theft” of relics is legitimated by a miracle.

Drapery produced in Brussels from drawings by Colihn de Coter (1455 – ca. 1538).
Musée national du Moyen-Âge-Thermes de Cluny, Paris (France).
Crédits : RMN / Gérard Blot / Christian Jean.
Public domain Image under URL: http://www.photo.rmn.fr/archive/83-000873-2C6NU0H19VG9.html (08/12/2014)

Source 3

Calvin, Treatise on Relics

From early on, there were critics against the multiplication of relics. The most virulent critics came from the Protestant reformers. John Calvin wrote a Treatise on Relics in 1543, at a time when he wanted to strengthen the community of Geneva and to get rid of all what, to his eyes, was obscuring the glory of God. Like Luther, he condemned the traffic and the cult of relics, and tried to dissuade people from believing in them. The second part of his treatise is an overview of all the existing relics he knew of, beginning with those of Christ, especially his Cross.
Building up his arguments on a critic expressed in former times, Calvin denounced satirically the multiple pieces of the Cross that were found so far, so numerous that they could fill a boat. As a theologian, he reminded believers that the Gospel clearly mentioned the Cross could be carried by one man. Unfortunately some faithful now worshiped pieces of common wood, as the Gentiles already did before them. In his book, Calvin also expressed in his own words an old opinion developed by Ambrose about relics, and already showing this was superstition, and false religion. Despite facing some fierce criticism from the Protestants, the Council of Trent (1547) reaffirmed the cult of relics, while Calvin’s book was becoming very successful.

The principal relics of our Lord are, however, those relating to his passion and death. And the first of them is the cross. I know that it is considered to be a certain fact that it was found by Helena, the mother of the Emperor Constantine; and I know also that some ancient doctors have written about the manner in which the discovery was certified that it was the true cross upon which our Lord had suffered. I think, however, that it was a foolish curiosity, and a silly and inconsiderate devotion, which prompted Helena to seek for that cross. But let us take for granted that it was a laudable act, and that our Lord had declared by a miracle that it was the real cross, and let us consider only the state of the case in our own time.
It is maintained undoubtingly that the cross found by Helena is still at Jerusalem, though this is contradicted by ecclesiastical history, which relates that Helena took a piece of it, and sent it to her son the emperor, who set it upon a column of porphyry, in the centre of a public place or square, whilst the other portion of it was enclosed by her in a silver case, and intrusted to the keeping of the Bishop of Jerusalem; consequently, either the before-mentioned statement or this historical record must be false.
Now let us consider how many relics of the true cross there are in the world. An account of those merely with which I am acquainted would fill a whole volume […]. How glaring, then, is the audacity now to pretend to display more relics of wood than three hundred men could carry! As an explanation of this, they have invented the tale, that whatever quantity of wood may be cut off this true cross, its size never decreases. This is, however, such a clumsy and silly imposture, that the most superstitious may see through it […].By these means they seduce ignorant people into idolatry, for they are not satisfied with deceiving the credulous, by affirming that pieces of common wood are portions of the true cross, but they pretend that it should be worshipped, which is a diabolical doctrine, expressly reproved by St Ambrose as a Pagan superstition.

Calvin, A Treatise on Relics, trans. V. Krasinski.