Rome — A Vatican researcher has rekindled the age-old debate over the Shroud of Turin, saying that faint writing on the linen proves it was the burial cloth of Jesus.
Experts say the historian may be reading too much into the markings, and they stand by carbon-dating that points to the shroud being a medieval forgery.
Barbara Frale, a researcher at the Vatican archives, says in a new book that she used computer-enhanced images of the shroud to decipher faintly written words in Greek, Latin and Aramaic scattered across the cloth.
The Shroud of Turin, a 13-foot-long linen revered by some as the burial cloth of Jesus, is shown at the Cathedral of Turin, Italy, in this Aug. 12, 2000, file photo. A Vatican researcher claims a nearly invisible text on the Shroud of Turin proves the authenticity of the artifact.
She asserts that the words include the name “(J)esu(s) Nazarene” — or Jesus of Nazareth — in Greek. That, she said, proves the text could not be of medieval origin because no Christian at the time, even a forger, would have mentioned Jesus without referring to his divinity. Failing to do so would risk being branded a heretic.
“Even someone intent on forging a relic would have had all the reasons to place the signs of divinity on this object,” Frale said Friday. “Had we found ‘Christ’ or the ‘Son of God’ we could have considered it a hoax, or a devotional inscription.”
The shroud bears the figure of a crucified man, complete with blood seeping from his hands and feet, and believers say Christ’s image was recorded on the linen’s fibers at the time of his resurrection.
The fragile artifact, owned by the Vatican, is kept locked in a protective chamber in a Turin cathedral and is rarely shown. Measuring 13 feet long and three feet wide, the shroud has suffered severe damage through the centuries, including from fire.
The Catholic Church makes no claims about the cloth’s authenticity, but says it is a powerful symbol of Christ’s suffering.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
The Church fought carbon dating of the Shroud for many years, partly because many earlier techniques for carbon dating would have destroyed too much of the Shroud but also, I believe, because the Church didn't want the Shroud dated with any certainty.
With the advent of scientific techniques that allowed dating from a single fiber it became obvious that any opposition from the Church was based more on political, religious reasons than any real concern for the Shroud. Finally, to save face, they permitted it. It was a gamble for the Church and they lost. Carbon dating is just about as infallible as the Pope.
More interesting to me is the legend of Glastonbury with the story and belief that it's thorn bushes descend from the crown of thorns. I would love to see a forensic botanist take this on.
75x55 (anonymous) says…
Single fiber - a truly infallible data sample!
How many folks would like to be convicted of capital murder on the basis of a single fiber?
Sorry, jury's still out on this enigmatic object.
As for this 'writing' - I'd agree with the Church representative (found in fuller article in other source) that this story has more to do with grainy photograph copies and vivid imaginations.
promitida (anonymous) says…
"Look! It's real, it says so right here!"
- Religious Research at its best
vladislav (anonymous) says…
Catholicism rejects young-earth creationism. As a Catholic though, I doubt the shroud is real.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Jesus is a largely fictional character, so why shouldn't he have his very own fictional shroud?
esteshawk (anonymous) says…
75- Check your zipper, because your ignorance is showing. Carbon dating has been proven time and time again as a valid scientific tool, and the Catholic Church has proven time and time again they are more of a political entitiy than a spiritual one - how many time has dogma been changed over the years gather more members, going all the way back to Saul of Tarsis: "well, you don't really need to be a Jew to become a Christian" or "well, you don't really need to be circumsized to be a Christian" or "well, those dietary restrictions in the Bible don't really apply."
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (anonymous) says…
"That, she said, proves the text could not be of medieval origin because no Christian at the time, even a forger, would have mentioned Jesus without referring to his divinity. Failing to do so would risk being branded a heretic."
Well, I suppose, under the circumstances, a leap of faith is permitted.
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (anonymous) says…
...
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
. . . .
You took my input, tangent, so I just added ellipses.
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (anonymous) says…
This just in... not only is the Shroud real, it is authentic!
-- for only the Hand of God could transmogrify the carbon-datable components of the linen to transform its apparent age.
( On the other Hand, given the Voice of God,
one has to wonder why He didn't just SHOUT that stain out. )
75x55 (anonymous) says…
You people will believe anything the scientists tell you, eh?
Don't know much about that vast sample size of one fiber, and the fact that the 'sacred carbon dating' that you seemingly worship is as easily skewed and flawed from centuries of potential contamination.
Where's that healthy skepticism? Oh, that's right - you don't want to allow any outcome that's 'undesirable'.
Odd that people don't note that the Catholic Church itself only says that it is an 'enigmatic object' - they don't say it is the shroud, only that it is claimed to be the shroud.
Some of you folks really get your panties in a wad over anything religious... sheesh.