O.K. writes:
In discussion about alleged letter of Alexius Commenus, attention turned to some dubious relics, like for example milk of the Virgin Mary. Calvin wrote about it in his Treatise on Relics in following way:
With regard to the milk, there is not perhaps a town, a convent, or nunnery, where it is not shown in large or small quantities. Indeed, had the Virgin been a wet-nurse herwhole life, or a dairy, she could not have produced more than is shown as hers in various parts. How they obtained all this milk they do not say, and it is superfluous here to remark that there is no foundation in the Gospels for these foolish and blasphemous extravagances.
Here is an answer to the Calvin’s question where this milk comes from. A beautiful local legend trying to explain quite natural phenomena (similar Greek myth claims that the Milky Way was caused by milk spilt by Hera when suckling Heracles):
http://www.seetheholyland.net/milk-grotto/
The moral is, never have preconvictions about relics, no matter how absurd they sound to your eyes. They may surprise you.
So a bottle of suspended chalk which anybody can go and collect by the bucketful was passed off as Mary’s breastmilk (it surely wouldn’t be kept in a reliquary if it was known to be nothing but a folk remedy). No wonder it hadn’t gone off! And any old cloth from Israel could be swaddling clothes or the robe or some other cloth sacred by contact. Nobody denies that Commenus’s collection of artifacts existed, there’s just no evidence that they were either as old, or from the people, they claimed to be. Note Calvin’s comment: “How they obtained this milk they do not say.” Why not? What had they got to hide?
Nobody denies that Commenus’s collection of artifacts existed, there’s just no evidence that they were either as old, or from the people, they claimed to be.
There is no evidence to the contrary as well. You don’t know, until you examine it. Do not give a verdict before a trial.
Note Calvin’s comment: “How they obtained this milk they do not say.” Why not? What had they got to hide?
Calvin was rather not interested in, say ,”technical details”, like overhelming majority of sceptics are not. They just want to ridicule, in their opinion, naive and superstitious items. No one would go and trace their origin -slandering is much easier than gaining evidence. Usually the sceptics and anti-catholics have more to hide, and obscure the truth, which often (like in the case of “bloodthirsty Inquisition”, Dead Sea Scrolls hidden by the Vatican, alleged antisemitism of Pius XII etc.) turns in the favor of the opposite group.
Why didn’t they say how they had obtained this milk? I don’t know, there may be various reasons, ignorance to its exact origin (fueling anti-Catholic myths) being one of them.
However, let’s look at the other examples, how the relics were obtained:
*the Crown of Thorns (essentially a wreath of reeds) was obtained by Louis IX for 135 000 golden livres (the entire Sainte Chapelle costed just 40 000)
* The relics of the True Cross were recovered by the emperor Heraclius in 628 after deadly war with the Persians.
* The Image of Edessa was brought to Constantinople in 944, at the ransom of 10 000 pieces of silver, and release of 200 muslim prisoners.
Isn’t it much cheaper and esier just to make a “factory” of faked relics, if forgeries were so common in the Middle Ages, as popular and often repeated (with no justification) stereotype claims?
Calvin was just one among others to be cynical about relics, but he also caused a lot of suffering for millions of people for generations with his doctrine of predestination which was used to justify slavery, even apartheid in South Africa. His doctrine weighs much more than what he wrote about the Virgin’s milk.
Calvin often exaggerated about relics. He made the claim that all of the relics of the true cross would form a whole ship’s cargo. The french archeologist Charles Rohault de Fleury did a study in 1870, cataloging all of the fragments of the true Cross that he could find. All of the extant known pieces of the cross didn’t even make up one third of what would have constituted the true cross.
Chesterbelloc, the true cross was part of Calvin’s cynical approach in the overall strategy to get at Rome. By the way,did you like the stuff on biblical archaeology?
Louis, yes, the article was excellent. Thanks again!
You’re welcome, Chesterbelloc. Are you studying apologetics, beyond Belloc and Chesterton, perhaps Cardinal Avery Dulles?
Louis, I have some books by Cardinal Dulles that I haven’t read yet. Besides Chesterton and Belloc, I really like Cardinal Newman.
The ‘Milk Grotto’ on the West Bank would seem to be the origin of the Virgin’s Milk. The link says it has been a site for veneration since the 4th century, fragments from the cave being sent to churches in Europe since the 7th century. Perhaps the cave limestone is the origin of the purported “milk relics”. There is a kind of closure that limestone dust was found on the Shroud cloth by STURP in 1978.
The legend has it that a drop of the Virgin’s milk spilled on the rock turning it white during the flight into Egypt fleeing Herod’s soldiers. I wonder if it is the same kind of aragonite limestone on the Shroud.
The only record of the story of Herod’s slaughter of the infants is to be found in the infancy narrative of Matthew’s gospel, and nowhere else. Some exegetes see the story as merely a means of getting the family into Egypt as Matthew wants to portray Jesus as the new Moses (and thus coming out of Egypt), and he does this in several ways. (e.g: Matthew has Jesus preaching from a mountainous place like Moses, whereas Luke has him preaching from flat ground). It also helps Matthew to get the family into Nazareth, (because of Archelaus) as Matthew did not know that they were Galileans originally from Nazareth, as did Luke know. I’m aware that Egyptian Christians take the Flight story seriously, and I’ve heard that there are various sojourn sites of veneration there accordingly.
Correction: The web-site has it that the rock is soft chalk not limestone, and hence not aragonite.
Dave, you are correct. There are a lot of oral traditions that has translated to a trail of churches and monasteries built on their proposed path. As a teenager I was on a week long bus trip organised by my church that visited most of these sites. One of the best trips I’ve ever had in my life. This link has images to a lot of the sites visited.
http://www.touregypt.net/holyfamily.htm
May 8, 2014 at 8:59 pm
Chesterbelloc says, “Louis, I have some books by Cardinal Dulles that I haven’t read yet. Besides Chesterton and Belloc, I really like Cardinal Newman.”
Very easy to agree with that, with that brilliant mind, and a saint’s way of life.