Another mystery of the Shroud of Turin solved

  • Thread starter Thread starter ncstevem
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well the lady must have the eyesight of an eagle because I can’t see any lettering on the shroud at all and why is she the only one to come up with this despite the number of people who have closely examined the Shroud?
 
thistle said:
Well the lady must have the eyesight of an eagle because I can’t see any lettering on the shroud at all and why is she the only one to come up with this despite the number of people who have closely examined the Shroud?
Click to expand...
She isn’t the only one who has seen these letters. The lettering on the Shroud was stated by researchers during the full examination of the shroud. What the words mean, however, is just coming through to us.

Plus, I believe but could be wrong, that the letters can only be seen through a negative of the shroud.
 
Actually the “whole inscriptions on the Shroud” thing (which isn’t new, BTW) has been questioned even by supporters, as well as those purported coins over the eyes. So, while I personally believe the Shroud is real, I take many of these purported discoveries that claim to see something using this or that device with a grain of salt since there’s also a possibility that that’s a mere case of pareidolia (?). Remember the images of Jesus or Our Lady that people claim to have seen on the clouds, on stains, on tree-trunks, on subways, or even on toasts?
 
patrick457 said:
Actually the “whole inscriptions on the Shroud” thing (which isn’t new, BTW) has been questioned even by supporters, as well as those purported coins over the eyes. So, while I personally believe the Shroud is real, I take many of these purported discoveries that claim to see something using this or that device with a grain of salt since there’s also a possibility that that’s a mere case of pareidolia (?). Remember the images of Jesus or Our Lady that people claim to have seen on the clouds, on stains, on tree-trunks, on subways, or even on toasts?
Click to expand...
Why remind people of tabloid journalism? The Church has officially approved Marian appearances. This is very important for Catholics to know. The Church has made no definitive statement about the Holy Shroud but the Church does believe it is the burial cloth of Jesus.

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Why remind people of tabloid journalism?
Click to expand...
Because, frankly, I personally think that many of these ‘discoveries’ that find something new - say, traces of coins or inscriptions - on the cloth is just that. Once again, I would reiterate that I do believe the Shroud is authentic, but that doesn’t mean that I would uncritically accept everything that people claim is on the cloth, because for one, a good number of these discoveries rest on finding them on photographs of the Shroud rather than on the cloth itself: for all we know, they could also easily be clumped photographic grains, caused by the recopying and enhancement of grain structure from earlier generation photographs. Also, the weave of the cloth is far too coarse to resolve things such as the rather subtle and very tiny inscription on a dime sized ancient coin. Sometimes the weaving could also make us see shapes and patterns that may or may not be actually there. Our eyes are misled rather easily: that’s why, as I’ve said, we sometimes experience pareidolia.
The Church has officially approved Marian appearances.
Click to expand...
She did, yes, but I’ve yet to hear of any statement regarding things like Our Lady of the Tortilla or Mary of the Grilled Cheese Toast as being approved by the Church. 🤷
This is very important for Catholics to know.
Click to expand...
Pardon my slowness, but which is? :confused:
The Church has made no definitive statement about the Holy Shroud but the Church does believe it is the burial cloth of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Actually, the first part of this statement is correct: as with all relics of this kind, the Church has made no pronouncements claiming whether it is Jesus’ burial shroud, or if it is a forgery. As with other approved Catholic devotions, the matter has been left to the personal decision of the faithful, as long as the Church does not issue a future notification to the contrary. So the second part of your statement is quite misleading: it is more correct to say that “a number of people (or even ‘many’ - but not all, of course) in the Church believe it is the burial cloth of Jesus,” since in the first part you’ve just said that the Church has no actual position on the Shroud.
 
edwest2 said:
Why remind people of tabloid journalism? The Church has officially approved Marian appearances. This is very important for Catholics to know. The Church has made no definitive statement about the Holy Shroud but the Church does believe it is the burial cloth of Jesus.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
You have contradictory statements in this sentence. If the Church has made no definitive statements about the Shroud how can you say the Church believes it is the burial cloth of Christ?
 
edwest2 said:
See section 2 of this address by Pope John Paul II:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/travels/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_24051998_sindone_en.html

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
Which…still doesn’t say anything that ‘the Church’ (as a whole, I assume, based on your wording) takes the Shroud as authentic. There’s nothing in that document by the late JPII that suggest that this is an ex cathedra statement: that it is dogma to believe the Shroud at Turin, Italy to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ, and failure to believe thus puts you out of communion with the Church. Rather, I’m more of the feeling that the address reflects JPII’s personal beliefs - which is not binding on others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top