Shroud of Turin

[Reuben_J]

I had the grace to pray before the Shroud, during the Great Jubilee, when it was on display. I spent about an hour in prayer before it. I was very moving and my sense of prayer was very deep and focused.

When I came out of he Church my eyes watered up, looking around I saw a man and wife come out and the man was crying. I believe it is the burial Shroud but my faith in Christ would not be changed if it were proved not to be.

I missed that but I would want to make it a point to pray before it when it comes to display again.

Personally, it is hard to believe that a true relic still survives until this day, what with wars and conflicts that the faithful had gone through. That would be a single great obstacle to conservation of ancient artifacts, more so religious ones, where there were strong rivalries and oppositions. But on the other hand, we cannot underestimate the power of God if it is His will that it remains intact for all to see.

God bless.

Reuben

 

[cornbread_r2]

Assuming its the burial Shroud of Jesus, how do you all suppose the photograph negative got there and resulted in it being a negative?

The shroud image isn’t a true negative – unless Jesus had white hair and white blood.



The image on the left is how the image appears on the shroud and the one on the right has been digitally processed.

 

[cornbread_r2]

If anyone’s interested, here’s a link to an extremely long and detailed debate on the shroud. IMO, it’s a very well sourced discussion and addresses every objection to the 1988 C14 dating results that I’ve seen.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

Considering St. Joseph has about 38 toes, I’ve never been one to cling much to relics. And that’s probably why I don’t know enough about it. Though for something that Christ actually touched, well…

Who wants to suggest some good reading?

Indeed, during Medieval times there was regrettably much abuse of relics and indulgences. There was at one time 7 heads/skulls that were claimed to be those of Our Lady’s mother.

I do think the Turin Shroud does not fall into the same category, though.

 

[Peregrinans]

Sorry in advance for the wall of words.

Does my faith hinge on the authenticity of the Shroud? Absolutely not. As Jesus said, “blessed are those who did not see, but believed.” So, in no way is it necessary for any Christian to think the Shroud is authentic.
Having said that, Jesus performed many miracles. Some of which so that people would see and understand who He was and believe. And we do have an extraordinary event that is part of our faith…the miraculous resurrection of our Lord. We believe that somehow after he was lain in the tomb…his body was no longer there, nor was He wrapped in His shroud any longer. He had risen. So we know that a miraculous event took place in that tomb and, per eyewitnesses, His burial clothes were left behind. This is what we absolutely know. So why is it such a stretch, for some, that some evidence of this extraordinary event was left behind in that tomb on the very cloth that covered His body?

I don’t believe it is a stretch, but is the Shroud of Turin that shroud?

I have studied it for years, and I by nature, am a very skeptical person, but eventually the scientific evidence was overwhelming. Now I know for some no amount of evidence will be enough and all evidence will be dismissed. Their minds are closed on the subject. For instance, normally in science if you have 101 findings and 100 point to it being one thing and 1 points to it being another, the anomaly is thrown out and the majority of data is seen as evidence. Not the shroud…the anomaly is seen as the ONLY evidence worth noting. Odd that.

When such people are asked, “Well if it is a fake how was it done?” They will either give the telltale answer of the intentionally uniformed and say it is a medieval painting, scorch, rubbing, photograph, etc. despite that all of these possibilities have been tested over and over again. It is not an artwork of any kind. Period.

Or they will say, “Nobody knows how it was done.” That is correct. But why? Are you suggesting that a medieval forger had more knowledge about photography, forensics, chemistry, history and biology…then we do today? And IF that were so, why would he try to fool people 700 years in future when he would be dead and gone? He only needed to fool his contemporaries. Why would he give his forgery photographic qualities? They were never going to see it the way we do now. Why did he not use red paint? They couldn’t tell the difference among paint, dye, human blood or animal blood, Why use blood from a torture victim that contained billirubin? Nobody would even know that such a thing existed. How did he not break the dried blood clots that were on the shroud when he removed the dead body after three days? How did he make the image go around the blood? (There is no image under the blood.) How did he only slightly change the very top fibrils of the fibers of the shroud? He would have had to use some substance, undetectable by modern man and apply it with a brush less than a single hair in width. Why would this super genius go to all these lengths to fool his fellow medieval people when he could have not done any of these extraordinary things…and **still **fooled them? Why did he want people hundreds of years in the future to see his genius and not those in his own time? Why? What logical reason would a forger do this? If I am going to forge something it is to make money and hit the road off to find my next mark. If I could get the same amount of money by painting a crude rendering of Jesus on the burial cloth (and there were tons of those floating around at the time) and selling it to some dupe for quick cash. Why would I do all of this other extra-extra ordinary feats of science, etc and possibly commit murder in the process? Give me one logical reason why someone would do that?

 

[Sarcelle]

Voted as an agnostic.

It would be and has been an interesting subject for a forensic investigation.

 

[Denise1957]

I voted for the first choice, but I don’t think that there’s evidence that points to it absolutely being the shroud of Christ. I would have preferred that a vote option in the poll included something like…“it seems likely that it is the shroud of Jesus.” I have a book on the subject, and it offers really good evidence (but not absolute proof) that it is indeed the shroud of Jesus.
If I could, I’d really like to see it (the shroud) someday.

 

[GKC]

I voted for the first choice, but I don’t think that there’s evidence that points to it absolutely being the shroud of Christ. I would have preferred that a vote option in the poll included something like…“it seems likely that it is the shroud of Jesus.” I have a book on the subject, and it offers really good evidence (but not absolute proof) that it is indeed the shroud of Jesus.
If I could, I’d really like to see it (the shroud) someday.

Sort of where I stand. But with maybe 12-15 books on it. I came to roughly the same conclusion.

GKC

 

[Denise1957]

Sort of where I stand. But with maybe 12-15 books on it. I came to roughly the same conclusion.

GKC

 

[Mostyn]

I don’t think there are enough options in the poll questions.

What about, do we think it was an already existing piece of art depicting Christ done by monks. AND do you think is it is the authentic shroud of cloth that Our Lord was wrapped in even though the Vatican has not made any pronouncement on it. I think they view it as an Icon of Our Lord.
It’s like the Medjugorje thing all over again. is it real or isn’t it?
or something along those lines.
Personally, I do not believe it is the shroud that covered Our Lord in the Tomb. Because there was a different covering used for the head and that was also removed. Its all too long ago and no proof whatsoever. yet anyway.

 

[Memaw]

I voted for the first choice, but I don’t think that there’s evidence that points to it absolutely being the shroud of Christ. I would have preferred that a vote option in the poll included something like…“it seems likely that it is the shroud of Jesus.” I have a book on the subject, and it offers really good evidence (but not absolute proof) that it is indeed the shroud of Jesus.
If I could, I’d really like to see it (the shroud) someday.

Can science ever actually “Prove” any miracle ? Even medical ones can be seen but how could one actually prove it a miracle? Isn’t that where Faith comes in. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Denise1957]

Can science ever actually “Prove” any miracle ? Even medical ones can be seen but how could one actually prove it a miracle? Isn’t that where Faith comes in. God Bless, Memaw

I don’t know about science being able to prove a miracle. Generally, when it comes to miracles having to do with the Catholic faith, we rely on the Church to make a definitive statement and ruling as to whether it’s really a miracle. To my knowledge, the Church hasn’t done this yet with the Shroud, but maybe I’m wrong about that.

 

[ajecphotos]

I for one would love it to be ‘the’ shroud. I cannot see at this present moment in time why it cant be! Jesus was covered in a shroud. What shouldnt it be the Shroud of Turin?

 

[Memaw]

I don’t know about science being able to prove a miracle. Generally, when it comes to miracles having to do with the Catholic faith, we rely on the Church to make a definitive statement and ruling as to whether it’s really a miracle. To my knowledge, the Church hasn’t done this yet with the Shroud, but maybe I’m wrong about that.

The reverence the Church shows the Holy Shroud tells us something. We rely on the Church to keep us from being misguided. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Denise1957]

The reverence the Church shows the Holy Shroud tells us something. We rely on the Church to keep us from being misguided. God Bless, Memaw

Yes, you are right. I saw a documentary on the Shroud, and it was handled with the utmost care. As I said, I think it’s likely (actually, HIGHLY likely) that it’s the Shroud that covered our Lord. As an aside, the SSPX is offering a pilgrimage to see the Should in a month or two. I seriously considered joining them, since I know the priest leading the pilgrimage to be a very holy priest. But then I thought better of it, in that it probably wasn’t a good idea after all. Oh well. God bless!

 

[Peregrinans]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

By the way THIS is what the shroud looks like if you were just looking at it and not the photo negative/positive that we are used to seeing. It is 14 feet long and about three feet wide. It shows the faint image, frontal and dorsal, of what appears to be a forensically accurate, naked, badly beaten, scourged, crucified man with a large wound on his side and puncture marks covering his scalp.

 

[CalCatholic]

Can science ever actually “Prove” any miracle ? Even medical ones can be seen but how could one actually prove it a miracle? Isn’t that where Faith comes in. God Bless, Memaw

No, science can never prove that the shroud is the burial cloth of Christ, and it doesn’t have to for me. I have been reading about and studying the shroud for about 10 years. I believe that it is in fact the burial cloth of our Lord! There is so much microscopic evidence that never gets reported in these specials on TV.

 

[Karen107]

I missed that but I would want to make it a point to pray before it when it comes to display again.

Personally, it is hard to believe that a true relic still survives until this day, what with wars and conflicts that the faithful had gone through. That would be a single great obstacle to conservation of ancient artifacts, more so religious ones, where there were strong rivalries and oppositions. But on the other hand, we cannot underestimate the power of God if it is His will that it remains intact for all to see.

God bless.

Reuben

This reminds me of the shroud. The image of the Odessa is not a painting and not some creation from mid-evil times.

Mark 10:27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”

All evidence aside I believe it is in Gods providence that we see this miracle of Jesus if only to increase our faith. What are miracles? From basic catechism… Miracles are a sign of Gods presence in the world. As the Eucharist is perpetually present to us, so is this shroud as a remembrance of the most important event in the life of Jesus and to every Christian, the Resurrection of Our Dear Lord. . It lifts up our hearts to Him.

I find it quite interesting that our altars are clothed with linen perhaps not by chance but because Jesus was clothed in linen and I think of how carefully those table linens are taken care of. I believe the shroud is where this tradition began. Wow I never even thought about that before~! And someone questioned how such a cloth could be perserved so well. Well great care would have been taken to preserve this special burial cloth of Jesus.

Two interesting links, the first about the scriptural references to the burial shroud as a table covering and some of the understood history of shroud before the middle ages, the second about linen as used as a altar cloth…

shroud.com/dreisbch.htm

churchlinens.com/linens/

Doing what I do for 30 years means that I’m aware of ‘trends’. In the past 10 years, I am aware of a ‘trend’ toward designing new large altars for our sanctuaries. I’ve recently prepared fair linen for two altars 54 inches in width/depth, one 60 inches and another that is 60 inches IN DIAMETER! I’m just finishing the preparation of a 48 inch wide fair linen. I’m quite out of patience with this! These very wide altars are simply unacceptable.

BECAUSE:

The symbolism of the altar is of Jesus immanent – Emmanuel; our Lord present among us when two or three are gathered together in His name. We use linen on the altar recalling Joseph of Arimathea’s gift of his own burial shroud in which to wrap our Lord’s poor broken Body when He was taken from His Cross. In tending the altars of our parishes, sacristans live with the reality of this symbolism.

It is the ministry of our sacristans to tend our altars with the same care we give to our husbands, wives and children. If we take seriously the symbolism of the altar, this depth of concern is required of us. The single most important consideration is that altar linens be clean, fresh and crisply ironed – at all times – not just Easter and Christmas.

Jews and Christians have both historically relished their relics... Someone else said they don't care about relics.  Well Jesus always used something of the earth and things created by human hands (as in linen) in his miracles, including the miracle of the bread and wine becoming the body and blood of our Lord.

 

[Brandon_Cal]

If anyone’s interested, here’s a link to an extremely long and detailed debate on the shroud. IMO, it’s a very well sourced discussion and addresses every objection to the 1988 C14 dating results that I’ve seen.

I was actually considering perusing the old JREF for some helpful links so thanks for beating me to it. I forgot how incredibly long and daunting threads got over there. And when did the name change happen? Is Randi no longer associated with the forum?

 

[jinglebelle]

I think it is totally valid to believe it to be authentic. If it weren’t authentic I can see how it would not affect your faith, but I imagine it could only increase your faith if it was truly confirmed as authentic. The reason I say this is because, it would truly be a miraculous relic and one that was left by the Lord himself.

If He left clues there would be no point of faith