Thursday, April 15, 2010

The Mystery of the Shroud


I remember well the media flurry in the 1980's over what is called the Shroud of Turin. Turin is the Italian city where the shroud was located but it could also be called the Shroud of Jesus, or so say those who believe it is Jesus' burial cloth. That's why it is famous. A certain tradition held that this was one of the burial cloths left behind in the tomb after Jesus' resurrection. It was first mentioned in records from the thirteenth century, and it's provenance was difficult to prove or disprove. With carbon dating used in the 80's scientists demonstrated that it was created in the thirteenth century, which makes sense given the earliest attestations.

At the time I wondered what the stir was about. Even if it were authentic, it doesn't prove the resurrection. Protestants aren't big on objects of veneration so it just didn't seem all that important. What is curious are some of the features of the shroud. It is an negative image of a human form, not unlike the negative for a photograph from the "olden days." Why would an artist create this sort of image, especially in that era? The blood in the appropriate places on the image may be human blood. And the nail wounds in the arms are at the wrist rather than the hand. Paintings from that time nearly always show wounds in the palms of Christ's hands yet we are now reasonably sure that those crucified were nailed through the wrists. It all seems like an elaborate and innovative deception, if not the actual shroud.

The shroud went on display again on April 10th after years of careful storage.

Does the shroud intrigue you? Would you want to see it if you had the opportunity?

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

I have a bit of an aversion to these kinds of things. I always have felt a bit stomach sick by the whole idea of Saints being cut up and divied up. If per chance I ever find say the toe nail of Mother Theresa, I pledge now to give it up free to good home. I am reading Constantine's Sword right now and I can't help but equate relics with evil at the moment. I guess it does intrigue me on the level of why pyschologically this trend ever took hold.

Nancy said...

In the mid 80s I was in Turin and infact went to see the Shroud. I was in my early 20s and I must admit all I really remember is looking at it in its glass case and thinking...hmmm...is this really what they say it is? I remember having doubts, as I looked carefully at this cloth that looked something like starched cheesecloth with tea stains. I don't remember the features you write about David, but I was young then.....

IanD said...

It certainly sparks an interest in many people. Perhaps just having a chance to see a 'piece' of Jesus would appeal to someone who might be struggling with their own belief; their own faith.

David Mundy said...

A "piece of Jesus" is a good term to describe the fascination with relics Ian.

Constantine's Sword is a vary thoughtful and well written book Pupil.

One of the reasons I enjoy writing this blog, Nancy, is hearing of the variety of readers' experience.

Thanks to all of you.

David Mundy said...

I'm not sure how "very" became "vary!"