Relics of Newman

11 Responses to Relics of Newman

1. Michael Hallman says:

   4 November 2008 at 6:02 PM

   When I saw the title of this post in my Google reader I was surprised that Paul Newman’s case for beatification had advanced so quickly :)
2. Jane Fulthorpe says:

   4 November 2008 at 7:50 PM

   Michael:

   That isn’t even remotely funny. If you want to challenge me on it, just get started. And remember: think before you comment.
3. Geoffrey says:

   4 November 2008 at 7:55 PM

   I got a chuckle.
4. Jack007 says:

   4 November 2008 at 9:07 PM

   Jane:
   LIGHTEN UP!
   Times are already tough enough.
   We aren’t talking about the Blessed Sacrament or Mary’s virginity.
   A little humor is what makes us Catholic, not Puritans.

   As an aside, the custom of the recognition, transfer etc. of relics can be hard for non Catholics and some Catholics alike.
   I find it fascinating.

   Jack in KC
5. Doug says:

   4 November 2008 at 9:11 PM

   Am I missing something? Jane doesn’t sound like someone I want to challenge, and I’m certainly not. I am curious though as to why Michael needed to be slapped down in such a combative manner.

   I for one perceived no offense in his comment.
6. Peter says:

   5 November 2008 at 1:17 AM

   I have watched the event but I believe the Mass was more Pontifical Mass in
   the ordinary form and not Solemn High Mass. The Ceremony was rather beautiful
   though. Ad orientem, seven candles, Roman chasubles, unbleached candles, etc.
7. leo says:

   5 November 2008 at 2:05 AM

   the chapel of st charles is on the epistle side of the oratory church and is an austere yet elegant counter to the lavish shrine to st philip on the gospel side, although there are few earthly remains i wonder if an effigy of newman might yet be displayed , Madame Tussards has a waxwork of the cardinal that dates from the early days of the exhibition which was still displayed the last time i visited
8. Sharon says:

   5 November 2008 at 5:32 AM

   I am really surprised that the coffin contained no bones. Does anyone know the reason for that?
9. Phil (NL) says:

   5 November 2008 at 7:20 AM

   Sharon: In the article the BBC website ran, the explanation was that the coffin had been in very humid ground for over a century, and wasn’t sealed against that moist. Under such conditions ‘dust to dust’ can happen rather rapidly.
10. Maureen says:

    5 November 2008 at 7:25 AM

    Bones and teeth can last a long time — thousands of years — if the soil is relatively well-drained, and thus dries out. Clay is particularly good, if I remember correctly. But if you have sopping wet soil that stays sopping wet all the time (as in the marshy ground at Newman’s grave), my understanding is that the water and bacteria and micro-critters pretty well dissolve and eat away everything, after a while. Then the component minerals tend to drain into the soil, and nothing much is left. I’m impressed that there were even scraps of clothes in the coffin; must have been tough fabric they dressed him in.
11. Maureen says:

    5 November 2008 at 7:26 AM

    Forgot to add that bogs are different, as they kinda cure you into leather with their chemical composition.