Preserved Saints

[HisdaughterJen]

What about the bodies that are authentic?

Authentically decaying corpses?

There are no authentic incorrupt bodies (Except Christ, of couse, about whom the scripture was written). It is a lie. It is an illusion.

Do you think it's a coincidence that this practice began around the time of the Reformation? It's about power...maintaining it.

 

[E.C.]

Authentically decaying corpses?

There are no authentic incorrupt bodies (Except Christ, of couse, about whom the scripture was written). It is a lie. It is an illusion.

Authentic incorrupt bodies.

Do you agree with the following: With God anything is possible. ?

 

[Thekla]

There are people who are choosing to believe the lie which is that these corpses are not decaying, therefore "incorruptible". But they are decaying...in fact, they are in various stages of decay and some have been mummified by all kinds of compounds thrown into the casket in hopes that they can one day exhume a REAL "incorrupt", non-decaying body. Then they can present it to the world and say, "See, we truly are the only true religion, approved by God. One of our clergy's corpses is not rotting." And then people will follow off after them without batting an eyelash or questioning the background of it.

Now, all they can do is present corpses in various stages of decay or decorated with wax to present an illusion ....and people still run off after it without questioning the people behind the illusion. They've tried to cover their behinds by defining "incorruptible"...meaning it can be in various stages of decay and still be "incorruptible" (much like they did with various stages or forms of worship so that worship of spirits of the dead or their relics is not the same as worshipping God...it's all in the definition, you see.)

They have taken a scripture about Jesus and run wild with it in hopes of maintaining power over the masses.

are you a Marxist ?

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Authentic incorrupt bodies.

Do you agree with the following: With God anything is possible. ?

Of course. But don't you find it odd that it only happens in the RCC/EO (which is an RCC offshoot)? Of course, your reply would be..."that's because we are the only true religion approved by God".

It is a self-perpetuating cycle. The purpose and the focus is not on God but on proving that there is only one religion approved by God and maintaining power. That is what drives the perpetuation of the illusion that keeps the "faithful" convinced.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

are you a Marxist ?

Certainly not!

But, you see, it is all about maintaining power after the schism and Reformation. Do you have any idea what kind of power the RCC had in the Holy Roman Empire? They lost a lot of it when the EO broke off and the Reformation happened. Imagine if they had not happened...There'd be 2 BILLION Catholics...if not more on the planet right now.

 

[E.C.]

Of course. But don't you find it odd that it only happens in the RCC/EO (which is an RCC offshoot)? Of course, your reply would be..."that's because we are the only true religion approved by God".

It is a self-perpetuating cycle. The purpose and the focus is not on God but on proving that there is only one religion approved by God and maintaining power. That is what drives the perpetuation of the illusion that keeps the "faithful" convinced.

First off, I really do not like the part I bolded. Orthodox and Roman Catholic division is different from Protestant and Roman Catholic division (but this isn't the thread for that, is it?)


As for the rest of this post, I fail to see what that has to do with the question I asked and am waiting a response for.

 

[Thekla]

Certainly not!

But, you see, it is all about maintaining power after the schism and Reformation. Do you have any idea what kind of power the RCC had in the Holy Roman Empire? They lost a lot of it when the EO broke off and the Reformation happened. Imagine if they had not happened...There'd be 2 BILLION Catholics...if not more on the planet right now.

Yeah, but the EO isn't "all-powerful" and still understands the spiritual significance of incorruption ...

 

[E.C.]

Yeah, but the EO isn't "all-powerful"

I just wish people would understand this. Then the threads would be a bit more peaceful.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

First off, I really do not like the part I bolded. Orthodox and Roman Catholic division is different from Protestant and Roman Catholic division (but this isn't the thread for that, is it?)


As for the rest of this post, I fail to see what that has to do with the question I asked and am waiting a response for.

It is my understanding that the main reason the EO broke off from the RCC because of a dispute over whether the Holy Spirit comes from the Father or from the Father & SON among other things.

If I am incorrect, enlighten me.

As far as the EO being "all-powerful"...did I say that? Doesn't the EO claim to be "apostolic" which the RCC recently declared as "ok" insofar as being "of the true church"?

But, back to the topic...yes, of course, God can do anything. If God allowed an authentic "incorrupt", non-decaying body to hang around or be put on display, what is the purpose? Does God need to prove that He is God? Does God need to demonstrate His power? Does God need to show the world that He has "chosen" the RCC or the EO as His church of choice through their dead clergy?

 

[Thekla]

Sorry, I do feel compelled to mention that the EO does not consider itself an "offshoot" -- though the separation is multi factored and occurred over centuries, the EO considers much in the RCC to be "Innovation" -- the unauthorized addition to the creed, papal authority and infallibility etc.

Orthodox joke:

How many bishops does it take to change a light bulb ?















What is "Change" ?

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Sorry, I do feel compelled to mention that the EO does not consider itself an "offshoot" -- though the separation is multi factored and occurred over centuries, the EO considers much in the RCC to be "Innovation" -- the unauthorized addition to the creed, papal authority and infallibility etc.

Orthodox joke:

How many bishops does it take to change a light bulb ?















What is "Change" ?

I see. So the EO doesn't like to change and it thinks that the RCC does a lot of changing...why? To keep up with the times? To maintain power/control?

 

[E.C.]

It is my understanding that the main reason the EO broke off from the RCC because of a dispute over whether the Holy Spirit comes from the Father or from the Father & SON among other things.

If I am incorrect, enlighten me.

As far as the EO being "all-powerful"...did I say that? Doesn't the EO claim to be "apostolic" which the RCC recently declared as "ok" insofar as being "of the true church"?

Well, the schism is a whole different story with its own rock throwing, name calling and history skewing. Not to mention gross misunderstanding.

But this isn't a thread about the Schism.
(although I do know that the "double lung" theory is popular among some Roman Catholics)

But, back to the topic...yes, of course, God can do anything. If God allowed an authentic "incorrupt", non-decaying body to hang around or be put on display, what is the purpose? Does God need to prove that He is God? Does God need to demonstrate His power? Does God need to show the world that He has "chosen" the RCC or the EO as His church of choice through their dead clergy?

1) Why God does what He does is beyond me. Yet having an incorrupt body is a sign of Sainthood. Many Saints who have been canonized had incorrupt bodies. Granted, there is no list of "requirements of Sainthood" in Orthodoxy and having an incorrupt body would not be on that list.

2) If He feels it is needed.

3) If He feels it is needed.

4) That is something that I haven't heard before.

I'm beginning to think that the core issue here is not so much incorrupt Saints, but more so canonization and Sainthood itself.

To really guess why God would allow a Saint's body to remain incorrupt (or at least in Orthodoxy) more or less requires knowing the role of Saints in Orthodoxy. I believe that a multitude of factors come to play, yet not everyone here understands the role of Sainthood in Orthodoxy, thus making this difficult.

Hints: What happens when one is chrismated? Why do people venerate the Saints?

 

[Thekla]

I see. So the EO doesn't like to change and it thinks that the RCC does a lot of changing...why? To keep up with the times? To maintain power/control?

I have no idea

but its not my Church, so its really not my business -- if that makes sense ...

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Well, the schism is a whole different story with its own rock throwing, name calling and history skewing. Not to mention gross misunderstanding.

But this isn't a thread about the Schism.
(although I do know that the "double lung" theory is popular among some Roman Catholics)

I haven't studied the history behind the Schism in-depth...just remembered small facts.

1) Why God does what He does is beyond me. Yet having an incorrupt body is a sign of Sainthood. Many Saints who have been canonized had incorrupt bodies. Granted, there is no list of "requirements of Sainthood" in Orthodoxy and having an incorrupt body would not be on that list.

2) If He feels it is needed.

3) If He feels it is needed.

4) That is something that I haven't heard before.

I'm beginning to think that the core issue here is not so much incorrupt Saints, but more so canonization and Sainthood itself.

To really guess why God would allow a Saint's body to remain incorrupt (or at least in Orthodoxy) more or less requires knowing the role of Saints in Orthodoxy. I believe that a multitude of factors come to play, yet not everyone here understands the role of Sainthood in Orthodoxy, thus making this difficult.

Hints: What happens when one is chrismated? Why do people venerate the Saints?

But, the point is how does God define "saint"? According to Him, all who believe in Jesus are "saints".
Rom 8:27And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.



Does the Spirit intercede for you and me? Then we are saints.

There are so many more verses...way too many to post.


You see, there's no need to classify people post-mortum. In God's eyes, we who believe are all saints.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

I have no idea

but its not my Church, so its really not my business -- if that makes sense ...

Yes, I see what you mean!

 

[E.C.]

But, the point is how does God define "saint"? According to Him, all who believe in Jesus are "saints".
Rom 8:27And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.



Does the Spirit intercede for you and me? Then we are saints.

There are so many more verses...way too many to post.


You see, there's no need to classify people post-mortum. In God's eyes, we who believe are all saints.

Yet there is a small difference between a saint and a Saint.

(seeing that you're offline right now, I'll wait until tomorrow)

 

[prodromos]

There are people who are choosing to believe the lie which is that these corpses are not decaying, therefore "incorruptible". But they are decaying...in fact, they are in various stages of decay and some have been mummified by all kinds of compounds thrown into the casket in hopes that they can one day exhume a REAL "incorrupt", non-decaying body.

You heard this on television so it must be true . Seriously though, I think we know enough about chemistry and biology today to be able to get consistent perfect results with our incorrupt saints if indeed that was what was being done. The truth of the matter is (in the Orthodox Church) we bury our dead in a wooden coffin in the earth. In many monasteries they don't even use a coffin so that decomposition of the flesh will happen faster, as they don't have the room for new graves so they keep reusing the same ones. We also have a tradition of distributing the relics of those God has revealed to be His true friends to Orthodox churches all over the world. When their bodies remain whole and do not decompose it actually causes problems (not that we mind that much).

Then they can present it to the world and say, "See, we truly are the only true religion, approved by God. One of our clergy's corpses is not rotting."

Can you point to where someone has actually done that? That certainly hasn't been the case in this thread. Generally I don't think incorrupt relics get mentioned much outside the Church so I suspect you are simply tilting at strawmen in that comment.

They've tried to cover their behinds by defining "incorruptible"...meaning it can be in various stages of decay and still be "incorruptible"

In all cases of incorruption in the Orthodox Church it is because there has been no rotting of the flesh which should have occurred after being buried in the earth. We have always defined "incorruption" broadly regardless of what you may believe. Have you ever been near a dead animal pit? If you have then you will know that the stench of rotting flesh is awful. That smell is completely absent in regards to incorrupt relics. When Saint Nektarios died in a small hospital room in 1920, his body immediately began to give off a sweet fragrance. He was not buried until four days later and his body still gave off the same sweet fragrance. When the nurse on duty changed his clothes in preparation for the removal of his body from the hospital, she threw his old clothes temporarily onto the next bed in which lay a man paralysed from the waste down for many years after an accident. Immediately the paralytic climbed out of bed and began walking, glorifying God because he had just been completely healed. In the end they had to close that room, eventually converting it into a chapel, because the sweet smell which remained long after St Nektarios' body had been removed was so overpowering that they could not place any patients there. When they opened his grave a year and a half later, his body remained exactly as it had been on the day of his burial, still giving off an ineffable fragrance. Lemon flowers which had been placed in his coffin before burial were also as fresh as they had been a year and a half before. He was reburied and every few years they reopened his grave for twenty years and his body remained exactly the same. Finally after twenty years, his flesh dissolved, only the bones remained, and his relics were able to be distributed to churches around Greece and abroad.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

You heard this on television so it must be true . Seriously though, I think we know enough about chemistry and biology today to be able to get consistent perfect results with our incorrupt saints if indeed that was what was being done.

http://mike.friese.com/pilgrimage/paris/bernaut.html

The above link is where I got the info about St. Bernadette and the carbon, calcium salt, etc in the coffin...as well as doctor's description of her body upon exhumation.

The truth of the matter is (in the Orthodox Church) we bury our dead in a wooden coffin in the earth. In many monasteries they don't even use a coffin so that decomposition of the flesh will happen faster, as they don't have the room for new graves so they keep reusing the same ones. We also have a tradition of distributing the relics of those God has revealed to be His true friends to Orthodox churches all over the world. When their bodies remain whole and do not decompose it actually causes problems (not that we mind that much).

Yikes...here a bone, there a bone, everywhere a bone...

Can you point to where someone has actually done that? That certainly hasn't been the case in this thread. Generally I don't think incorrupt relics get mentioned much outside the Church so I suspect you are simply tilting at strawmen in that comment.

No, no strawman...check out the link above.

In all cases of incorruption in the Orthodox Church it is because there has been no rotting of the flesh which should have occurred after being buried in the earth. We have always defined "incorruption" broadly regardless of what you may believe. Have you ever been near a dead animal pit? If you have then you will know that the stench of rotting flesh is awful. That smell is completely absent in regards to incorrupt relics. When Saint Nektarios died in a small hospital room in 1920, his body immediately began to give off a sweet fragrance. He was not buried until four days later and his body still gave off the same sweet fragrance. When the nurse on duty changed his clothes in preparation for the removal of his body from the hospital, she threw his old clothes temporarily onto the next bed in which lay a man paralysed from the waste down for many years after an accident. Immediately the paralytic climbed out of bed and began walking, glorifying God because he had just been completely healed. In the end they had to close that room, eventually converting it into a chapel, because the sweet smell which remained long after St Nektarios' body had been removed was so overpowering that they could not place any patients there. When they opened his grave a year and a half later, his body remained exactly as it had been on the day of his burial, still giving off an ineffable fragrance. Lemon flowers which had been placed in his coffin before burial were also as fresh as they had been a year and a half before. He was reburied and every few years they reopened his grave for twenty years and his body remained exactly the same. Finally after twenty years, his flesh dissolved, only the bones remained, and his relics were able to be distributed to churches around Greece and abroad.

So, the flesh finally "dissolved" instead of "rotted"?
It sounds like an "urban myth" or "old wives tale".
Is there any way of actually proving the authenticity of the claims made?

 

[Axion]

No, you are wrong. Bernadette was buried with salt and with carbon. Both were failed attempts to someday dig up an "incorruptible body". She has more than just a microscopic layer of wax to cover up discoloration. They hired a company specializing in wax coverings (like Madame Troussaud's) to cover her up.
From http://mike.friese.com/pilgrimage/paris/bernaut.html
"The Sisters who had buried her thirty years earlier noted only that her hands had fallen slightly to the left. But the words of the surgeon and the doctor, who were under oath, speak for themselves:
"The coffin was opened in the presence of the Bishop of Nevers, the mayor of the town, his principal deputy, several canons and ourselves. We noticed no smell. The body was clothed in the habit of Bernadette's order. The habit was damp. Only the face, hands and forearms were uncovered.
The head was tilted to the left. The face was dull white. The skin clung to the muscles and the muscles adhered to the bones. The sockets of the eyes were covered by the eye-lids. The brows were flat on the skin and stuck to the arches above the eyes. The lashes of the right eyelid were stuck to the skin. The nose was dilated and shrunken. The mouth was open slightly and it could be seen that the teeth were still in place. The hands, which were crossed on her breast, were perfectly preserved, as were the nails. The hands still held a rusting rosary. The veins on the forearms stood out.
Like the hands, the feet were wizened and the toenails were still intact (one of them was torn off when the corpse was washed). When the habits had been removed and the veil lifted from the head, the whole of the shriveled body could be seen, rigid and taut in every limb.
It was found that the hair, which had been cut short, was stuck to the head and still attached to the skull -- that the ears were in a state of perfect preservation -- that the left side of the body was slightly higher than the right from the hip up.
The stomach had caved in and was taut like the rest of the body. It sounded like cardboard when struck.
The left knee was not as large as the right. The ribs protruded as did the muscles in the limbs.
So rigid was the body that it could be rolled over and back for washing.
The lower parts of the body had turned slightly black. This seems to have been the result of the carbon of which quite large quantities were found in the coffin.
In witness of which we have duly drawn up this present statement in which all is truthfully recorded.
Nevers, September 22, 1909
Drs. Ch. David, A. Jourdan. "

This is all a bunch of hooey!!! There was carbon, zinc, crystals, and calcium salts put in the coffin with her for preservation. She is mummified. She has had a nose job and has wax masks covering her hands and face to keep up the APPEARANCE of incorruptibility. IT is a lie. This is not the handiwork of God but of liars.

You WANT to see a lie clearly. You have not quoted the full description of Bernadette's body, not accounted for her incorruption.

From this examination I conclude that the body of the Venerable Bernadette is intact, the skeleton is complete, the muscles have atrophied, but are well preserved; only the skin, which has shriveled, seems to have suffered from the effects of the damp in the coffin. It has taken on a grayish tinge and is covered with patches of mildew and quite a large number of crystals and calcium salts, but the body does not seem to have putrefied, nor has any decomposition of the cadaver set in, although this would be expected and normal after such a long period in a vault hollowed out of the earth."

Nevers, April 3, 1919, Dr. Comte


Despite years in a damp coffin there was no smell of decomposition or any but surface effects.

And how on earth could Carbon be used as a preservative??? That is ludicrous. It is more likely to aid decomposition.

As far as calcium salts are concerned, these only appeared at the SECOND opening of the coffin. Ten years after the first, and were most likely the result of the washing of the body with soap (Calcium based) before reinterring it again.

Some people dont want to see a miracle
​

 

[HisdaughterJen]

You WANT to see a lie clearly. You have not quoted the full description of Bernadette's body, not accounted for her incorruption.




From this examination I conclude that the body of the Venerable Bernadette is intact, the skeleton is complete, the muscles have atrophied, but are well preserved; only the skin, which has shriveled, seems to have suffered from the effects of the damp in the coffin. It has taken on a grayish tinge and is covered with patches of mildew and quite a large number of crystals and calcium salts, but the body does not seem to have putrefied, nor has any decomposition of the cadaver set in, although this would be expected and normal after such a long period in a vault hollowed out of the earth."

Nevers, April 3, 1919, Dr. Comte​

Gee whiz...you haven't even quoted the entire account. There are two or three doctors accounts posted on the link. I have underlined the descriptions that detail that the body is decomposing or at least mummified. It certainly isn't as soft and supple as the day she died.

Despite years in a damp coffin there was no smell of decomposition or any but surface effects.

​

No, because she's mummified by all the carbon and salt thrown into her coffins over the years. ​

And how on earth could Carbon be used as a preservative??? That is ludicrous. It is more likely to aid decomposition.

​

DO a little research. There are many carbon-based preservatives. Whoever threw the carbon and calcium salts and crystals in the coffin had one purpose in mind...and it still didn't work. All they did was mummify the body.​

As far as calcium salts are concerned, these only appeared at the SECOND opening of the coffin. Ten years after the first, and were most likely the result of the washing of the body with soap (Calcium based) before reinterring it again.

​

Read the DOCTOR's accounts. Carbon was in the first coffin. The quote above literally says (in bold) that the skin is covered in mildew and "quite a large number of crystals and calcium salts". Someone is trying very hard to preserve (in a crude way) the woman to perpetuate an illusion.​

Some people dont want to see a miracle

​

What miracle? Her nose was dilated and shruken. Her skin was shriveled and gray. Her muscles had atrophied. She had mildew all over her skin...what does the Bible say about mold and mildew?

Lev 13:52He must burn up the clothing, or the woven or knitted material of wool or linen, or any leather article that has the contamination in it, because the mildew is destructive; the article must be burned up.


So, who's kidding whom here?

Here's the verse of scripture that this entire charade is based on:
Psa 16:9 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will rest secure,
Psa 16:10 because you will not abandon me to the grave,[fn3]
nor will you let your Holy One[fn4] see decay.
Psa 16:11 You have made[fn5] known to me the path of life;
you will fill me with joy in your presence,
with eternal pleasures at your right hand.

This is talking about JESUS!

Does anybody stop and think about this? People are digging up bodies, throwing "preservatives" in coffins, putting the bodies on display in various stages of decomposition and/or mummification, covering some with wax and saying, "Look...it's incorruptible!", even while the bodies themselves are turning all shades of colors and shriveling up before your eyes.

Are people really that hard up for a miracle from God?