Studio Sindone

The new website about the Shroud: a matter of reason, not of faith

A MESSAGE IN CODE FOR THE MAN OF THE 21^st CENTURY?

by Antonio Bonelli and Filippo Spanò

The conflict between faith and science and between faith and reason,
is one of the most amazing swindle of human history.

Summary

The "history" and its limits in the Shroud affair
What's the response of "science" - First Part
What's the response of "science" - Second Part
How had that extraordinary image formed?
The "affair" of the C14 dating
Who is the man of the Shroud?
Discussion

The "history" and its limits in the Shroud affair

The presence of the Sacred Shroud in France in 1353 is historically certain, and known is also the itinerary from there to Turin, where it still is.⁽¹⁾ It was ever since thought to be a mortuary linen cloth. Bearing the image of a man's corpse with several signs consistent with the Passion suffered by Jesus Christ, it looks surprisingly similar to the one that for many centuries had been exposed to the worshippers' veneration every friday in the church of St. Mary's in the Constantinople district of Blacherne. Among the illustrious visitors to whom the Byzantine emperors exhibited it between 1171 and 1203 were William, Chancellor of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and archbishop of Tyre, and the king of Jerusalem Almeric. From there it disappeared in that tragic 1204, when the city fell to the Knights of the IV Crusade and was heavily ransacked. Many objects of great devotional and artistic value were then robbed ant taken to Europe by the conquerors as war trophies. Though not historically proved, it's nevertheless certain that the same lot was met also by that linen, as the holiest relic of Christendom. Isn't it then possible, that the shrouds of Turin and Constantinople are the same one? Many and convincing arguments are clearly in favour.⁽²⁾

What is known of the precious linen cloth of Constantinople before it appeared in that city? Suggestive is the story of Edessa (the present Turkish town of Urfa), then in Syria and one of the first Christian churches, founded according to the tradition by the disciple Thaddeus.⁽³⁾ A manytime folded up linen known as the Edessa mandillon (mandylion or mandillon, in greek "μανδύλιoν"), with the suffering Christ's visage represented on its cover face, is a crossing of legend and tradition hinting to its appearance there in very old times through uncertain ways. For many centuries it was hidden in a niche of the city walls for fear of plunderers and desecrators.⁽⁴⁾ In 944 Edessa, fallen to the Muslims in the VII° century, was reconquered from the Arabic by the Byzantine general John Curcas who, having discovered the mandillon, took it along to Constantinople. If all this is true, the linen of Edessa, Constantinople and Turin could be considered as a unique object with reasonable certainty (Rambaud and Runciman). These historic researches and many others of the kind still on the way, seem us of great speculative intrest but of very little importance in the end, since bound for nowhere. In fact, should they even conclude that the Turin Shroud already existed at Jesus' times, this would never prove it is really the one cited by the four evangelists.⁽⁵⁾ That is is why, we confine them in marginal notes. So, we have to go another way through. Indeed, neither history nor faith are able to bring forth that identification. Only science can, scanning throughout the misteries hidden in the linen cloth and the image on it.

Services and tools

Share | | More..

Email a friend

Notes

(1) Unknown is how, in 1349, the Shroud became property of King Philip II of France (see also note 2). One year later, on his death-bed, he bequeathed it to his faithful esquire Geoffrey the Count of Charny and lord of Lirey, a little village in the Champaigne Region, perhaps in reward for his taking sides in the war against England. It is just in the year 1350 that we fix the "official" entry of the Shroud of Turin into history. During the Hundred Years' War, Margaret, the Geoffrey's grand-daughter, took it off from the canons of Lirey, to whom it had been entrusted, and to safeguard it from plunderers and damaging put it in safe in her husband's castle. In 1452, she refused to hand it over again to the canons who claimed their rights on it, and sent it to Chambéry to a cousin, Anne, daughter of the king of Cyprus and wife of the Duke of Savoy Louis I. Two years later, Pope Sistus IV granted the Duke permission to build a chapel for the Shroud in his capital-city Chambéry, and with the bull Romanus Pontifex in 1506 Pope Julius II allowed the Christians to venerate the Shroud as a holy relic. On the Holy Saturday of 1503, the linen was taken to the near town of Bourg-en-Bresse to be shown to the Archduke Philip le Beux of Austria, there on a trip. Back stadily in Chambéry after several public ostensions throughout France, between 3rd and 4th Dec. 1532 the Shroud was hardly rescued from a fire that destroyed the wooden chapel where it was kept. Due to the flames and the water of extinction, the linen, then twelve times folded on itself in a casket, was only little damaged. When inspected stretched out, it disclosed the presence of sixteen large and twelve lesser holes, later mended by the Clares Sisters of that city. In 1578 the Duke Emmanuel Philibert made the transfer of Shroud from Chambéry to Turin to shorten as possible the pilgrinage of Milan's Archbishop, Carlo Borromeo, who had vowed to go to France on foot to venerate the Shroud as a sign of thanksgiving to God for having released the city of Milan from the plague. And in Turin it remained: til 1694 in the chapel of the Royal Palace, then inside the Cathedral, then in the Chapel of the Shroud built ad hoc within that apse. There it was kept until 1997 when, luckily retrieved from an arson, was placed again inside the Cathedral, where still now is. In 1983 Humbert II of Savoy, the last King of Italy, donated it to the Holy See (source of point 1 was mostly from O'Connell's book).

(2) The hypothesis is plausible, though most is unclear of what happened to the linen cloth of Constantinople in the one-century and half period between its vanishing from the shores of the Bosporus and its appearance in France. To take it there has likely contributed the Burgundian Otto de la Roche sur-Ognon, Grandlord of Athens, "latin" commander of the District of Blacherne, where it was kept in St. Mary's church. He would have taken possession of the Shroud as war booty, is thought having sent it to his father as a present for the bishop of Besançon. Placed there in the cathedral of St. Etienne, it was exposed to the believers' veneration every year on the Holy Saturday until 1349, when a fire broke out. The casket with the relic, left luckily undamages, vanished in the bustle of the event to emerge sometimes later in King Philip's VI hands. Proved uneless the requests of the bishop to regain it, he ordered a copy of it to be painted - seemingly very similar to the original - to expose to the believers' devotion in the same cathedral.

(3) Intresting, but little reliable is the Byzantine historian from the XIII-XIV century Nicephorus Xantopulo Callisto (ca 1256 - ca 1335) - and his Greek sources of the IV-VI centuries - in his book translated in Latin under the title Nicephori Callisti Xanthopuli scriptoris vere Catholici, Ecclesiasticae historiae libri decem & octo, Basileae per Ioannes Issi 1551, given at work by the translator. In the II volume, chapter VII, we read that the disciple Thaddeus, one of the Seventy, was sent by the apostle Thomas to Edessa to start preaching there the Gospel. Agarus, the king of the city, charged a skilled artist to go for Jesus and paint his portrait. The artist went and standing in a high place he tried out his task but couldn't, since the divine brightness and grace shining on Jesus' face prevented him from. Realizing it, the Saviour took a linen cloth with his own image already imprinted and sent it to Agarus. It was by sure a selfimpressed portrait ("picturam scilicet άυτόματον", the last word untranslated in the Latin text). The features of Christ and of His Mother were taken also to the Persian King. It is in fact said, that he as well, moved by ardent faith, had sent a skilful painter to Jesus, who gave him a selfportrait and a portraite of his mother painted by himself. All these facts were deduced from documents and the archives of Edessa City, at that time ruled by a King. In volume XV, chapter XIII, we read: Pulcheria (399-453, sister of the emperor Theodosius II and she herself Roman Empress of the Orient after his death) founded the church of Blacherne to keep the image of Mary painted by the evangelist Luke. In chapter XXIII we find the mantle of the Virgin Mary laid in the round and spired church (in rotundo atque acuminato templo) called Blacherne, in the city suburb bearing this name. Lastly, in chapter XVI, volume XVII, Edessa is described as marvellous ("mirifica") and by voice and people believe governed ("supra opinionen & fidem omnium gesta"), by the image not made by men ("non manufacta") of Our Lord God and Saviour ("servatoris") Jesus Christ. The uneasy comparison of data and dates might suggest that the linen cloth or clothes kept for short time in Edessa had reached Constantinople already in the V century, that is half millenium before the year 944. In conclusion and with the due reservations on the authenticity of this text, it's difficult to believe that the "Edessa story" is bereft of any historic ground.

(4) The Edessians feared their relic might be destroyed by the orthodox Judeans, but also by Christians: first ones felt a deep repugnance against objects somehow related with corpses, while second ones although they were allowed to represent Jesus by the the Mystic Lamb, they weren't allowed to represent the signs of Passion and cross, still retained for centuries the symbol of an infamous death. It was only after the Council of Constantinople of 692 that on the cross appeared Jesus alive, whereas the dead Christ became commonplace only in the X century. But the worst hazard for the mandilon was at first represented by the Muslims who conquered the city in the VII century, and then by the iconoclastic fury of the VIII and IX centuries.

(5) Matthew, 27,59: So Joseph (from Arimatea) took the body (of Jesus) and wrapped it in a clean shroud (σινδόνι καθαρά) and put it in his own new tomb...
Mark, 15,46: And he (Josepf of Arimatea), bought a shroud (σινδόνα), took Jesus down from the cross, wrapped him in the shroud (σινδόνι) and laid him in a tomb...
Luke, 23,53: He (Joseph of Arimatea) then took it down, wrapped it in a shroud (σινδόνι) and put it in a tomb...
John, 19,40: They (Joseph of Arimatea and Nicodemus) took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths (όθονίοις) with the spices, following the Jewish burial custom.
Luke, 24,12: Peter, however, went off to the tomb, running. He bent down and looked in and saw the linen cloths but nothing else (όθόνια).
John, 20,4-7: ("the other disciple") running faster than Peter, reached the tomb first; he bent down and saw the linen cloths (τά όθόνια) lying on the ground (κείμενα) ... Simon Peter, following him, also came up, went into the tomb, saw the linen cloths (τά όθόνια) lying on the ground (κείμενα), and also the cloth (τό σουδάριον) that had been over his head; this was not with the linen cloths (μετά των όθονίων), but rolled up (έντετυλιγμένον) in a place by itself.