I am studying a Agnus Dei made of rock crystal of the 16th century. The piece / pendant has a little center door that opens and inside a fragment of the blessed wax (Agnus Dei) is found. What is this little door for? The Agnus Dei with a door was it used for a special purpose or by a certain type of person?

There were some bone fragments found under St. Peter's Basilica in the 1940's. Pope Paul VI said in 1968 that the bones were "identified in a way that we can consider convincing." What is the convincing argument that these bones are indeed's St. Peter's? A perfect answer will include the details about how the bones were found. ___ On a related note, the bones have recently been made available for public viewing for the first time . During a Mass, Pope Francis seemed to venerate the relics, which may mean that the Church will officially declare them as St. Peter's bones.

So, I was looking up the church that the Pope wanted to be buried in, and I found this Wikipedia article about a piece of artwork that was painted on a table that Jesus built for his mother, now called the "Salus Populi Romani". The artwork is a very impressive relic in its own right, of course, as it's a portrait of Mary painted by one of her friends (who was one of the fathers of the Church and the author of one of the Gospels), but I'm really interested in the table. It was literally hand-carved by Jesus, so it'd surely be a holy relic even if it didn't have a portrait of Mary painted on it, but I can't find any images of it in an online search. I can only find pictures of the artwork painted on it, and pictures of the installation of it in a church in Rome. Are there any images of the table? Does it still have any of its legs attached, or have they been removed? If they have been, are they displayed as a relic somewhere else or have they been lost or destroyed at some point in the last 2000 years?

Roman Catholics claim to have any number of *relics* which are significant to the Christian faith, of which the [Shroud of Turin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin) is probably the best known. There also seem to be some strong arguments for the authenticity of the same. If, as they claim, the Orthodox church is the "true" church, why would God allow these (apparently genuine) relics to fall into the hands of those who have fallen away, rather than preserving them for the True Church? (I am looking primarily for Orthodox responses, though one might ask Protestants a similar question, as both believe the RCC to be in error. Also, whether the Shroud specifically is a genuine relic isn't the point as such, although "they aren't genuine relics" may be a possible *answer*.)

Is the House of Loreto (originally in Nazareth, but later miraculously transported to Loreto, Italy ) Sts. Mary & Joseph's house or Sts. Joachim & Anna's, or was it both of theirs? Did St. Joseph inherit the house from his in-laws?

There were several Sacred items that were buried with the Plates of Gold by the prophet Moroni: > "Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under > the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I > looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates, **the Urim and > Thummim, and the breastplate**, as stated by the messenger. The box in > which they lay was formed by laying stones together in some kind of > cement. In the bottom of the box were laid two stones crossways of the > box, and on these stones lay the plates **and the *other things with > them*.**" (JS–H 1:52) > Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris, saw these items at Fayette, New York, in June 1829 (see Doctrine and Covenants Section 17 ) > > "Behold, I say unto you, that you must rely upon my word, which if you > do with full purpose of heart, you shall have a view of the plates, > and also of the **breastplate**, the **sword of Laban**, the **Urim and Thummim**, > which were given to the brother of Jared upon the mount, when he > talked with the Lord face to face, and the **miraculous directors *(Liahona)*** which > were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the Red > Sea." (D&C 17:1) According to the LDS church, where are these items now?

I was recently gifted a medal with an ex indumentis relic. Now, the red protection has been lost and I'm not sure if the white in my medal is the relic itself or some base... How are medal relics made? I'm really worried for this...

I have a third class relic from Blessed Carlo Acutis. If I touch that item to another item, does that item become a third class relic also?

Are there any legends about what happened to Jesus's clothes after they were distributed? Any legends about the people that received them?

It's not hard to understand why the New Testament might resonate more strongly for the cultivation of relics than the Old Testament over the centuries of the Church's history. To name a few: - The Holy Grail - The Spear of Destiny - The Stone of Unction (once resided in Ephesus) - The True Cross - The Holy Girdle (and other Marian relics) - Bones of the Saints Many of these New Testament relics hold clear theological and soteriological significance. With regard to why early Christian institutions (Byzantine Church, Roman Church, as well as quasi-autonomous monasteries) have not devoted resources to the acquisition of Old Testament relics, I can think of two major factors: - Preservation bias (the Old Testament happened a long time ago) - Less straight-forward interpretation [This](https://www.routledge.com/Studies-on-the-Cult-of-Relics-in-Byzantium-up-to-1204/Wortley/p/book/9780754668473) scholarly work lays out some of the thinking behind the acquisition of relics in Byzantium, how they were collected and what divine influence they were expected to provide. The focus is clearly on Passion relics and virtually nothing on relics from the Pre-monarchistic period or Post-exilic period that bookends the Old Testament. The closest thing I was able to find was featured in a different monograph from Brill Publishing, titled [The Paintings of the Pre-Islamic Kaaba](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1523357) . Here the author highlights that the Kaaba once housed ram horns believed to originally have belonged to the ram that Abraham sacrificed in place of Isaac. While the time period is concurrent with Christian relic acquisitions, it's an Islamic view on the sanctity of an Old Testament relic. Moreover, I have not encountered any Christian institution that had an expressed interest in acquiring the ram horns of Abraham's sacrifice.

Question

Taking the general direction of my above research, what evidence do we have for the existence of Old Testament relics that were sought after by the early Church(es)? Not including the Ark of the Covenant, which is rather ubiquitous.

According to the 1980 edition of *Modern Catholic Dictionary* by S.D. John A. Hardon, S.J., a *relic* is defined as follows: > 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. I purchased the aforementioned dictionary from a second-hand book seller by mail and it arrived yesterday. I marvelled at the very good condition that the book was in for its age, except for a signed note that was handwritten on the first blank page. When I later took a look at the note, I saw that it had been written and signed by "John A. Hardon, S.J." His cause for Sainthood has already been opened; and so, Fr. Hardon is officially recognized by that Catholic Church as a *Servant of God.* **Question**: Though S.D. John A. Hardon has not been declared a Saint yet by the Church, and though the book which contains his signed handwritten note was purchased by me (not expecting such a note), may this book still be considered to be a *relic* of his? If so, should I have it blessed by a Catholic priest?

Did anyone keep the sandals of Jesus that He had worn during His Mission on earth, after His crucifixion ? Is there any Christian group, in any part of the world, that venerates the sandals of Jesus, on the lines of veneration that is given to the Milk Grotto of Bethlehem ?

So, I recently found out about how the Main Cathedral of the Armed Forces in Russia maintains a section containing Adolf Hitler's hat and uniform as relics within a wing of its building. Since it's my understanding the Catholic and Orthodox churches only maintain relics of the saints, does that mean that the Russian Orthodox Church recognizes Adolf Hitler as a saint? Can someone go to visit the church to see Hitler's hat and pray for him to pray to God on their behalf? If they don't regard Hitler as a saint, then why do they maintain his relics?

In Orthodoxy, cremation after death is not permitted. It is not preferred in Catholicism. This is because of the strong respect for the integrity of the body. Both traditions are also strongly pro-life/anti-abortion. Yet all churches in these traditions must be consecrated with the relics of a saint. So is someone out there...cutting up saints' bodies?! How do these traditions understand the dignity of a body, even to the point of not destroying a dead one, but yet we disseminate these holy relics? (Please note I am not asking why we *venerate* relics, I am asking how their *creation* squares with other teachings on bodies.)

I have been told that all major Catholic churches contain within the altar a relic of a saint. Given that saints are not declared until long after the death of the person in question, and many saints die in less than favorable conditions, how does the Church go about verifying and collecting relics?

I'm wondering if there is any evidence for the authenticity of various relics such as pieces of the "true cross".

The altars in Roman Catholic churches must be consecrated with a saint's relic (preferably a martyred saint). These "relics" are body parts, usually a small bone fragment but sometimes what is referred to as a "major" relic is incorporated within or under the altar. A major relic could be an arm, a leg, or perhaps even an entire body. I have five questions pertaining to this method of consecration: 1) Are altars with major relics more consecrated than others? If not, why use a whole leg? 2) Does the relic play a role in transubstantiation ? 3) Is there a stockpile or inventory of body parts kept somewhere awaiting the consecration of new altars? 4) In the event that a Roman Catholic church closes, is the relic recovered? Is it "retired" or returned to "inventory"? 5) Is there a searchable database listing which relics are associated with each Church? Can we know how large a piece of saint is used or merely the saint's name?

We all have heard about the incorruptible bodies within the Catholic Church tradition. Was there any scientific explanation given to the Roman Catholic Church or did the Church give a scientific explanation for why we have found incorruptible bodies of some saints or people? How was it classified by the Church? Was it classified miraculous and if yes why the Catholic Church doesn't use this to prove the authenticity of faith in God and doesn't challenge the scientific community?

*The Incorruptibles* by Joan Caroll Cruz has many stories about incorruptible saints. These saints with incorruptible bodies are Catholic, and I never heard any Protestant, other non-Catholic Christians, or even other religions claim they have members whose bodies are incorrupt. Does the Catholic Church have a good explanation on why this is? Does the Holy Eucharist have something to do with the incorruptibility?

As far as I know, there is a vast body of evidence of incorruptibility of some saints in Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Here is a picture of the incorruptible relic of St. Aleksandr Svirskij from Wikipedia : Such cases have often been presented as a proof of the correctness of the Catholic and Orthodox Faiths - as opposed to the numerous Protestant faiths (as far as I know, there are no cases of incorruptibility in Protestantism). I wonder if any attempts have even been made in the main-stream Protestantism to explain this body of evidence or was it simply ignored? If there were such attempts made, then what main points have been presented?