[Trod Upon]

How do they verify their claims? Sure, the church has a tradition and there's somebody buried in the various locations, but how can they say with certainty "this is the Mathias," etc.? Are there known descendants to test against or some obvious indicia of authenticity?

[Lent]

Good question.

[wideawake]

Has anyone ever done a DNA test on known descendants of King Tutakhamun to make sure that really was him buried in that tomb?

How about living descendants of Ulysses S. Grant - when was the last time they cracked the tomb open and did a tissue sample?

And how do we know these descendants are really descendants?

[boatbums]

How do they verify their claims? Sure, the church has a tradition and there's somebody buried in the various locations, but how can they say with certainty "this is the Mathias," etc.?

I think the answer is "tradition", like you said. It's a little creepy to me, but some of these "remains" were not complete - meaning not all the body parts could be accounted for. Some bones may be where they are said to be - though after all this time, there will be nothing but ashes left - but there was a lucrative market for relics and the more prestigious and wealthy a church was, the better chance they got to get "dibs" on the important relics. Some small insignificant church may only have been able to get Saint So-and-so's baby toe. It's no surprise that Rome laid claim to most of the "biggies". It borders on the macabre, to me, because people come to venerate these remains and relics as if they had supernatural powers. At the resurrection, it's a good thing God knows who is where, that's all I can say. ;o)