When I was reading today’s Gospel (Mc 16:1-7) the thought of the Holy Shroud came to me.

As most of you may know, it is a linen sheet with an imprinted image of the front and the back of a crucified man. The imprint shows the unexplainable and peculiar features that normally belong to a photographic negative.

The claim is made that it is the actual "clean linen cloth" in which Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of Jesus Christ, when Joseph, helped by Nicodaemus, lowered Jesus from the Cross.

The Shroud began to "surprise" a century ago when it was photographed for the first time by Secondo Pia, in 1898.

The negative of that photograph revealed in detail, and with even greater clarity than the positive image, all the "wounds" that the Shroud preserved.

Science has not yet come up with any plausible explanations as to how the image was formed on the Shroud.

Below is a list of definitive results from research carried out this century:

The image is not a painting, and it was left by the corpse of a man who was beaten and crucified. Computer processing has shown that the image has three-dimensional properties, something which neither paintings nor standard photographs possess.

Pollens have been found on the cloth, strongly supporting the view that the Shroud spent time not only in Europe but also in the Near East.

Tests on traces of blood from the Shroud have revealed the presence of human blood from blood group AB, which is a popular group in Israel.

In 1988, carbon-14 dating was carried out on a fragment of the Shroud. The results date the fabric to between 1260 and 1390 A.D.

The scientific community itself now questions these results, and more recent experimental studies have reopened the debate.

Modern science is still investigating how the image was formed, its date, and how best to preserve it.

Though the RCC has not taken an official position regarding the Shroud and, therefore, Christians are not supposed to accept or refuse it, those of us who have been lucky to see it in Torino cathedral, cannot help but believing that it actually covered Jesus’s body and was left in the Tomb when Jesus Christ resurrected. :p:p

I think it's real. When they redo the carbon 14 test on an actual sample from the main body of the shroud versus the part of the shroud that was repaired after the fire in the middle ages it will be proven to be from the time of Christ and proven to be authentic.

From everything I have ever read about this piece of linen and the extensive testing done on it I was rather disappointed to learn that it was supposedly a forgery from the middle ages. I was glad to hear that they were retesting the main body.

John 20:7
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
(KJV)

Doesn't this pretty much resolve the question about whether the shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus or not?

Jesus was apparently not buried in a one piece shroud.

If God had wanted us to place significance in relics, the Apostles would have chosen a few good ones, don't you think?

galveston,
I have also read and seen much about that shroud.
That includes photos of the image left from the coins that were place over the eyes of the person in the shroud.
It is very interesting that the coins used were those issued during the rule of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.
With all of the evidence presented so far I'm convinced that it IS the shroud in which Jesus body was wrapped at the time of His burial.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

I think it's real. When they redo the carbon 14 test on an actual sample from the main body of the shroud versus the part of the shroud that was repaired after the fire in the middle ages it will be proven to be from the time of Christ and proven to be authentic.

From everything I have ever read about this piece of linen and the extensive testing done on it I was rather disappointed to learn that it was supposedly a forgery from the middle ages. I was glad to hear that they were retesting the main body.

---

Most of the information we have re. The Holy Shroud precisely proceeds from the studies carried out by the NASA when, as of 1977, a group of scientists led by Dr. John Jackson and his colleague Dr. Eric J. Jumper, carried out Project S.TU.R.P.

You might be interested to visit this website:

Catholic.net - La autenticidad de la Sábana Santa.

That gives a rather exhaustive account of NASA works on the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

John 20:7
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
(KJV)

Doesn't this pretty much resolve the question about whether the shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus or not?

Jesus was apparently not buried in a one piece shroud.

If God had wanted us to place significance in relics, the Apostles would have chosen a few good ones, don't you think?

---

You are surely talking about the Face-Cloth that was put over the head of Christ.

This piece of cloth –also called “The Sudarium” is in the Cathedral of San Salvador in Oviedo, Spain. It is displayed to the public three times a year, on Good Friday, the Feast of the Triumph of the Cross on 14th September and its octave on 21st September.

You may be interested in the Sudarium website

Also a series of radio programs on the Sudarium were broadcast by Living his Life Abundantly and you may listen to them.

Also there is a book by Mark Guscin entitled The Oviedo Cloth.

“The Sudarium is a love letter from all eternity. It is as if God reserved this relic until the time when our faith was flagging and when science could help unravel its significance. Its significance would not have been known centuries ago”.

One thing which I marvel at is how easily we pretend to associate our own thinking to GOD's designs.

When you say "If God had wanted us to place significance in relics, the Apostles would have chosen a few good ones, don't you think?" are you not considering God has to follow human's logic?

In any case, I also say GOD's ways are inscrutable..

gromitt82.
Thanks for those post on that.
There are losts of relics related to the New Testament and the saints.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

gromitt82.
Thanks for those post on that.
There are losts of relics related to the New Testament and the saints.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

---

However, the Church must always be very cautious about them, for there are many falsifications.
In the Valencia cathedral they claim they have the original Hioly Grail, which they like to proudly show to all those who request them to see it.
However, they also admit they just assume it is going by a pretty old tradition, but they cannot affirm it is the real one...

gromitt82,
That IS interesting since, historically speaking, no one knew of the "holy grail" until a fictional story was written with it mentioned there in and that was several hundred years after Jesus walked this earth.
Also the holy grail is recorded to be a saucer, a cup, a chalice, a mug, etc...
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

gromitt82,
That IS interesting since, historically speaking, no one knew of the "holy grail" until a fictional story was written with it mentioned there in and that was several hundred years after Jesus walked this earth.
Also the holy grail is recorded to be a saucer, a cup, a chalice, a mug, etc.....
Peace and kindness,
Fred

---

Fred,
But that is not the only so to speak "funny" thing about religious relics. Many Catholic churches in Europe and in Latin America (perhaps in the USA, too) claimto possess fragmentary remains which are by tradition alleged to be those of the True Cross. Their authenticity, however, cannot be officially accepted for lack of evidence as to whether they actually belonged to the Cross.

In fact, I have read that if we should put together all the fragments to be found in all the churches that claim theirs is original, we could build a few scores of crosses...

As far as I'm concerned, the only fragment I have seen that I think is True, is the one that can be seen at the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, in Jerusalem... :)

gromitt82,
Yes that is true.
There is also a half of the sign nailed to the cross of Jesus that exists and it is claimed to be authenticated.
Fred

I know you guys like relics, but when you have a LIVING LORD why do you need relics?

galveston,
We don't NEED relics.
But since we do have holy relics why nor make use of them?
They just other ties to out Lord.
I think of them as historic valuables worth preserving.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

I know you guys like relics, but when you have a LIVING LORD why do you need relics?

---

As Fred points out very rightly, we DO NOT NEED any relics. But they are there, and most of them come from old times when people DID feel more attached to them.

But going by your statement, what would you do now with them? Throw them them into the garbage pail.. Destroy them.. I have read in the newspapers that Michaell Jackson paraphernalia is going to be sent to some kind of auction for his fans...

I bet you anything that the whole lot will be sold and people will pay foolish amounts of money for something so ridiculous like a pair of old shoes...

I think this is much more extraordinary that we keep some devotion and/or interest to garments or objects we can identify NOT with any old crooner or singer but with our VERY LORD and GOD, don't you think?:D:D

gromitt82,
Point well made.
Thanks,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

gromitt82,
Point well made.
Thanks,
Fred

---

Thanks, Fred:):)

Relics are fine in a museum. Do you venerate them?
I hope not, that would be idolatry.

Galviston,
What makes you think the venerating relics would be idolatry?
I see a lot of venerating going on regarding people, and things that are "regarded with respect, reverence, or heartfelt deference".
None of them that I know of are worshiped. THAT would be idolatry as far as I'm concerned.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

Relics are fine in a museum. Do you venerate them?
I hope not, that would be idolatry.

---

To the best of my knowledge, Galveston, Museums are places where people like to go to watch and admira works of art, whether ancient or modern. I have never heard of any museum anywhere where they keep relics belonging to any religion... Not even in India where relics and images of Indian gods are always displayed in temples or special places in the open. Never in Museum.
However, I know of certain museums - Elvis Presley has one his Memphis, Tenn. Home -
Where people do worship what they are exhibiting, be it an old guitar or some underwear..
I would say that's not idolatry, that's ridiculous..
As for Catholic relics they are ALL kept in temples, churches, shrines and abbeys.:D:D

gromitt82,
Very Good.
The only relics I can think of that are in museums are things like dinosaur bones.
Fred