What do you think of the Shroud of Turin?
There was an article picked up on the NZ Catholic site last week about the fact that, by order of the Pope, the Shroud of Turin will be on display in 2010. This is apparently a big deal as it’s usually kept locked
“inside a casket made of a special space-age alloy that is waterproof and fireproof and is hermetically sealed to keep out oxygen.” Which makes it a bit difficult to go have a look-see one would think.
I’m not sure what I think about the Shroud, to be honest. I grew up with my parents having a cool picture of the Face in the Shroud, and when you looked at it on a certain angle, it became a painting of Christ’s face. It was pretty cool, but it took a number of years before I learned what the creepy other face was.
Then there was that exhibition back a few years ago at the Aotea Centre here in Auckland. The exhibition basically laid out all the various pieces of fact and fiction about the Shroud, including a documentary showing the carbon-dating work that was carried out in the 80’s. That rekindled my interest in the “relic”, and it’s always bubbled away in the back of my mind – what if it is the cloth that wrapped the Body of Christ? It seems, if you’re a fan of science, that it’s probably not, but that exhibition that I went to at least left reasonable doubt in my mind.
Anyway, I just thought I’d ask y’all out there – what do you think of the Shroud of Turin? Is it the real deal? Or just some impressive piece of “art”? What if it is? And what if it isn’t?
<
I must admit, I am somewhat of a skeptic with these things although not all of them!! (before everyone bites my head off)
That said, I think if they inspire devotion in people and a sense of awe, reverence and helps them grow in their relationship with God, I don’t see any thing wrong with it it, even if it the Shroud is a very clever fake. Ultimately, its task is to point to God and if they accomplish that, then thats awesome!
Gianna,
do a bit of research on the Sudarium of Oviedo. It claims to be the head cloth of Jesus:
This might help, especially from pp. 4-5:
http://www.shroud.com/heraseng.pdf
It’s pretty full on, though.
A simpler look (one I find easier) can be found at:
http://www.shroud.com/guscin.htm
I have done some already; I know the claims and I know the arguments for both sides. I think they both have some very convincing points, but the skeptic in me tends to err on the side of caution. I just wonder given the very embarrassing death of Jesus and the disciples reactions after, if the shroud was really kept. Perhaps it is, and I don’t mean to offend any people here who believe it, but personally, I don’t think so.
I understand that research is for something different; due to exams I don’t have much time to look into it, but I certainly shall!
I have posted a blog entry referencing your post, and commenting on it, at http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2008/06/shrouded-in-mys.html. Thanks for the enjoyable posting.
Corrected link to previous comment: http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2008/06/shrouded-in-mys.html
I think that the real shroud would have been kept, especially if it had traces of Christ’s form on it. I don’t think one would find his death embarassing if he has risen from the dead. John and Peter entered the tomb afterwards – John tells us that at least he believed when he saw the empty tomb and cloths!
I don’t know if the shroud of Turin is the real deal, like anyone else on the blog I imagine – but I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that it is one day. There is usually much more to be said for things that have been treasured through the ages than for retrospective ’scientific’ investigation into history.
Once we didn’t have gnostic writings, only records of the rebuttals by the Fathers of the Church. And when those writings came to light, it turned out that the fathers were very fair and accurate in their quoting of them and in their assessment of their arguments. That is normal, because the conversation was real at the time. Yet before scripts were found, there were many people who assumed skeptically that any account by the victors was necessarily biased and untrue.
When I was in Israel, I stayed at a house of the community of the Beatitudes at a site that may have been Emmaus. That was a curious town – there are a few different theories as to where it might have been. This claim was an interesting one, because a 19th century Carmelite mystic was going through the Holy Land founding convents, when she came across a field, broke down and wept there and said: this is the site of Emmaus. She managed to obtain the land with the intention of building a monastary there. She died and nothing was built there for many years. When finally time came to build, digging revealed the remains of a 12th century crusader Church and under that the remains of a 4th Century Byzantine Church, and under that the remains of 1st Century buildings and streets. In Israel that is a sign that there was once considered to be a sacred site there back in the time of St Helen, and it was reinforced by the devotion of the crusaders. This is often the case in the holy places of Israel.
Similarly, I stayed at the sisters of Nazereth, who had a convent over what may have been the tomb of St Joseph. Why would we think that? Because there was an oral tradition in the village that the spot had long ago been called the ‘tomb of the just one’ and again digging revealed the same thing: a 12th century crusader Church, a 4th Century church and 1st century remains.
It restored my faith in these sort of oral traditions. I think that Black Adder (I’m thinking of the selling of fingers of Jesus in packets of 10) and a general heritage of modern skepticism inherited from Descartes can infact be quite a limit to our openness to past wisdom humbly passed on in villages by word of mouth.
The shroud is a different matter of course, but it poses more questions than it answers if it is a fraud and I think that the number of people who jumped for joy when it was considered for a moment that it was medieval in date, did not bother to stop for a minute to marvel at the wonder of this artistic and technological achievement at that time. The shroud is no painting. That is the one of the most interesting things about it.
I say again: I truly wouldn’t be surprised to find that it is true.
Being a scientist and all, it is not easy for me to say this…
I think it is the real deal.
I have read enough about the provenance of the cloth, the debates on the carbon dating, the history of the shroud and the images upon it etc.
It is not crucial for me to believe in the Shroud. If it was shown tomorrow beyond all doubt that it was a fake, it would not alter my faith.
But I believe it to be the real deal, based on what I have seen.
My gut feeeling, having read something about the shroud, is that it is quite possibly authentic.
I’m not sure it really matters either way.
Even if it’s just an icon of Christ, he’s really present in his icons and ought to be venerated just as much as if the shroud really was the authentic burial cloth.
God Bless
I visited the Shroud Exhibition brought to Auckland by Barrie Schwortz some years ago. Barrie originally became interested in the Shroud as he was the official photographer either for a magazine article or at the time of the carbon dating investigation – sorry I can’t remember which). Interesting is the fact that he describes himself as a “non-messianic Jew” (what does that mean – can anyone shed some light?) and he believes totally in the validity of the shroud. He is now resident in Australia and you can visit his website. It was fascinating and humbling to lisen to an American Jew – a non Christian defending the authenticity of the winding cloth of Our Lord to the goodly number of aggressively hostile non-believers
A messianic Jew is usually a Jew who believes that the messiah has already come.
A non-messianic Jew would believe that the messiah has not yet come.
God Bless
My money is on it being the real deal. And if not, it should go down in history as an incredible work of medieval technical mastery of a still unknown medium.
What about the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, by the way?
I’ve been there. Its the real deal
I’d love to see it.
Me too