Apart from archeological differences of opinion, the classic ecclesial criterion for identifying Christian martyrdom, the vial of blood and the palm branch inscription, are historically documented to be found at the loculus of Filumena. (57) The future Benedict XIV quotes Pope Clement IX in a decree of April 10, 1668 in confirmation that the blood vial and the palm image truly constitute the findings of a martyr: "Censuit Sacra Congregatio, re diligentius examinata, palmam et vas illorum (martyrum) tinctum pro signis certissimis habenda esse." (58) The December 10, 1863 Decree of the Congregation of Rites under Bl. Pius IX further confirmed the statement of Clement IX: "Philias vitreas aut figulinas sanguine tinctas, quae ad loculus sepultorum in sanctis coemeteriis vel intus vel extra ipsos reperiuntur, censeri debere martyrii signum." (59)
Therefore, the identification of Filumena by the Holy See's Custodian of Relics as a Christian martyr is, by explicit Church criteria, true and accurate. The further theological rationale contained in the reported comments of St. Pius X are worthy of summation: 1. the witness of St. John Vianney makes clear the modern historical reality of St. Philomena and the exceptional spiritual efficacy of devotion to her; 2. whether Filumena is her accurate name or not is secondary to the fact that the person of these sacred remains was a person declared by the Church as a virgin and martyr; 3. this person was so beloved by God that she has been granted the ability to intercede for extraordinary graces for those who invoke her intercession.
Properly understood, these theological and historical facts should place the questionable and secondary archeological objections in a properly subordinate position.
Recent Church documents In a surprising act which ran contrary to the historical succession of papal magisterial encouragement of public liturgical veneration for the martyr saint, the Congregation of Rites issued a 1961 instruction removing St. Philomena from liturgical calendars.60 The instruction was issued without rationale for the liturgical action, but common theological opinion concluded to the lack of historicity concerning St.Philomena's origins, coupled with doubts prompted by the archeological controversy initiated by Marucchi. (61)
|