The Shroud of Turin: An Enigmatic Anomaly

[Ivan Seeking]

No, the Pope said a lot more than that: Page 1:

"Indeed it is a winding-sheet that was wrapped round the body of a man who was crucified (corresponding in every way)..."

And page 3:

"The Shroud is an Icon written in blood; the blood of a man who was scourged, crowned
with thorns, crucified and whose right side was pierced. The Image impressed upon the Shroud is that of a dead man, but the blood speaks of his life. Every trace of blood speaks of love and of life. Especially that huge stain near his rib, made by the blood and water that flowed copiously from a great wound inflicted by the tip of a Roman spear. "

The Pope (and others) are free to believe what they will; to me, these statements demonstrate the Pope's infallible word that the Shroud of Turin is in fact the burial shroud of Jesus. As opposed to say, calling it a *representation* of the burial shroud, perfect in every detail.

He was drawing strong parallels [the reasons why many think or thought the shroud to be authentic], but he never made any declarations. Also, according to the Catholic faith, the pope's word is only infallible wrt church doctrine - this because they believe Jesus gave the Pope power to define sin. You can't be in error about the rules when you make the rules!

I could be reading this wrong, but I don't think he meant to say it is authentic. It would surprise me if he did given that no pope before ever made such a declaration. The shroud is used as a symbol of faith for what it represents, and not for what it may actually be.

Papal infallibility is the dogma in Roman Catholic theology that, by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error[1] when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the universal Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. It is also taught that the Holy Spirit works in the body of the Church, as sensus fidelium, to ensure that dogmatic teachings proclaimed to be infallible will be received by all Catholics. This dogma, however, does not state either that the Pope cannot sin in his own personal life or that he is necessarily free of error, even when speaking in his official capacity, outside the specific contexts in which the dogma applies...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility

 

[Andy Resnick]

As I said; I'm not interested in discussing beliefs. Walter McCrone's findings are reasonably conclusive and passed peer review:

http://mcri.org/home/section/63-64-293/the-latest-shroud-update

http://mcri.org/home/section/63-64/the-shroud-of-turin?PHPSESSID=fd4982ceec20411d96f2deb56945523e

 

[Ivan Seeking]

As I said; I'm not interested in discussing beliefs. Walter McCrone's findings are reasonably conclusive and passed peer review:

Yes, rather than sticking to the facts, you specifically called the Pope's belief and Catholic doctrine into question.

To say the cloth "speaks to" biblical teachings, is not a declaration of authenticity.

Reasonably conclusive? Either they are conclusive, or not.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Yes, rather than sticking to the facts, you specifically called the Pope's belief and Catholic doctrine into question.

To say the cloth "speaks to" bibilical teachings, is not a declaration of authenticity.

Reasonably conclusive? Either they are conclusive, or not.

It is fact that the coloring on the shroud is not from blood. It is fact that the shroud is not contemporaneous with jesus. The pope's statements are factually incorrect.

The pope can believe whatever he wants. You can believe whatever you want. You are free to come up with alternate hypotheses for the existing experimental results, propose tests to select one hypothesis from many, carry out the tests, and publish the results. That's how science works.

I'm a scientist- I believe nothing and hold no-one's word to be sacred.

 

[alt]

It is fact that the coloring on the shroud is not from blood. It is fact that the shroud is not contemporaneous with jesus. The pope's statements are factually incorrect.

The pope can believe whatever he wants. You can believe whatever you want. You are free to come up with alternate hypotheses for the existing experimental results, propose tests to select one hypothesis from many, carry out the tests, and publish the results. That's how science works.

I'm a scientist- I believe nothing and hold no-one's word to be sacred.

The Catholic Church doesn't promote is as been authentic. I suppose they suspect that it may not be, and are silent on the issue rather than end up with egg on their faces.

Also, a relative of mine was over there in the last couple of years, and she says they no longer even display it - the just show an opaque container that it is supposed to be held in.