Shroud of Turin again on display in 2010

Benedict XVI’s announcement will allow millions of people to see the linen cloth that according to tradition was wrapped around the body of Jesus after his death, showing that “mysterious Face, which silently speaks to the hearts of men, inviting them to see in it the face of God.”

Vatican City (AsiaNews) – For 40 days in the spring of 2010 it will be possible to see the Shroud of Turin which, according to tradition, is the cloth in which the body of Jesus was wrapped after his death and which shows the marks of the Passion and Crucifixion as told by the Gospels.

Benedict XVI, who owns the Shroud, made the announcement yesterday when he met the participants to the pilgrimage organised by the Archdiocese of Turin led by the local archbishop, Card Severino Poletto, who is the custodian of the Shroud. The Pope spoke about to the display in relation to the diocese’s pastoral journey, which in 2010 will be devoted to a “closer contemplation of the mystery of the Passion of Christ.”

“In such a context I am happy to fulfill your great expectations and accept your bishop’s wish, allowing the Shroud to be solemnly put on display in the spring of 2010,” said the Pope. “It will be a most propitious occasion, I am certain, to contemplate that mysterious Face, which silently speaks to the hearts of men, inviting them to see in it the face of God.” For the Church the Shroud is not a “relic” since it has never actually said whether it is the linen cloth in which the body of the dead Christ was wrapped or not.

At the time of the last display in 2000 (previous ones took place in 1973 and 1998) John Paul II referred to it as “icon”. At the same time though, the Church has never denied that the linen cloth might be the one the Evangelists talk about in the Gospels. On several occasions the Church has allowed the Shroud to undergo scientific tests, with contradictory results that are still source of great debate among scholars around the world.

"longer passage through the shroud"?

For example. the distance from the tip of the nose to the back of the skull is longer than the distance from the eye lid to the back of the skull. Therefor, the reasoning was that as the body passed through the cloth, the tip of the nose to back of the skull travel time would be greater, thus more exposure, than the eye to back of skull travel time. I really do not subscribe to this because there are major issues with this scenario. For example, whatever was the mechanism of the image forming process, it also formed images of non-body items, such as the coins on the eyelids with sufficient resolution to be able to identify them specifically.

Is it a fact that the bottom blood stains on the shroud are more visible than the top ones?

That hold true only for many of the scourge marks because on the back they were pressed into the cloth. The wrist, forehead, forearm blood trails are quite visible and striking, especially in the negative. The pooling of blood post-mortem is a well known phenomenon, and since the body was lying on its back, the wounds on the back were more likely to seep.

How soon after death would the blood coagulate and no longer leave stains?

First of all, the blood stains are blood. Contrary to the skeptics assertions that it is not, some of the top experts in blood and blood and blood components have confirmed it.
Dr. Walter C. McCrone, a microscopist, and the one scientist who claimed the Shroud is a "beautiful medieval painting," asserted that the blood on the Shroud was a red tempera paint, a mixture of Red Ochre (Iron Oxide) and Vermilion (Mercury Sulfide). He determined this by looking through his microscope.
Drs. John Heller and Alan Adler concluded that is was actual blood material on the basis of physics-based and chemistry-based testing, specifically the following: detection of higher-than-elsewhere levels of iron in "blood" areas via X-ray fluorescence, indicative spectra obtained by microspectrophotometry, generation with chemicals and ultraviolet light characteristic porphyrin fluorescence, positive tests for hemochromagen using hydrazine, positive tests for cyanmethemoglobin using a neutralized cyanide solution, positive tests for the bile pigment bilirubin, positive tests for protein, and use of proteolytic enzymes on 'blood' material, leaving no residues. Also tests for reflection spectra indicative of bilirubin;s and blood's presence, chemical detection of the specific protein albumin, the presence of serum halos around various 'blood' marks when viewed under ultraviolet light, immunological determination that the 'blood' is of primate origin.
The late John Heller received a doctorate in medicine from Case Wester Reserve university School of Medicine, taught medical physics and internal medicine as a Professor at Yale University, was a co-founder of the New England Institute for Medical Research for doing basic research in the common areas of biology, physics and chemistry.
The Italian commission's attempts to dissolve the granules of what appeared to be blood during chemical treatment with acetic acid, oxygenated water, and glycerin of potassium were all unsuccessful. The commission's report states "the pigmented encrustations did not pass into solution in the solvents, acids and the alkalies we used." Heller's specialty is in chemical analysis of blood. He states that the commission's and McCrone's negative test results were meaningless, explaining that "If you don't do the right tests in the right way, you can never get old blood into solution. If it's not in solution, you can't obtain a positive test."
McCrone asserted: "If the (STURP) don't find potassium with iron and calcium—tain't blood!" McCrone claims there is no potassium in the blood stains. However, The X-Ray Fluorescence team at Los Alamos National Laboratory of Dr. Larry Schwalbe, Dr. Roger Morris, and J. Ronald London, reported that although they could not determine whether the "blood stains" were blood or pigment, they did find iron, calcium and potassium. Incidentally, they found uniform levels of iron on the shroud except in blood stain areas where there was a large spike. Image area iron levels were indistinguishable from the background iron levels. That demonstrates that the image, at least, is NOT made of iron oxide. In their peer reviewed published paper on the subject, Morris et al, write that while their findings "do not prove that the stains are blood, they are generally consistent with this hypothesis." Without further testing, however, they concluded that "we can say no more than that either blood or some iron-based pigment was used to produce the ['blood'] stains."
Once Jackson and Jumper regained possession of the samples from McCrone, they were delivered to Heller and Adler. Instead of the itty-bitty single stain and the small bilong they had been working with that McCrone had originally sent them they found that there were ""...a whole jungle of stuff here. Good grief, there are microacres of what looks like blood." Adler, taking Heller's place at the microscope exclaimed "If that isn't blood, I'll eat this microscope." Both of these men are EXPERTS in blood research, unlike McCrone.

". . . Heller (suggested), “Let’s check with at least two other top hemoglobin hotshots and see if they are as sure as we are. Pick anyone you want.” Adler’s choice gave the answer of old acid methemoglobin (a blood derivitive - Swordmaker). They then spoke via speakerphone to Bruce Cameron, “whose double-doctorate is dedicated to hemoglobin in all its many forms,” and upon receiving and plotting the numbers, Cameron said, “You both should know what it is. It’s old acid methemoglobin. I don’t know why you wanted to bother me with something you know as well as I do.. Hey, wait a minute. Are you two idiots working on the Shroud of Turin?” At this point, Heller and Adle shook hands after smiling at each other."
— The Shroud of Turin’s ‘Blood’ Images: Blood, or Paint? A History of Science Inquiry," by David Ford.

Now, as to your specific question. Normally, blood coagulates fairly rapidly. The blood stains have also been confirmed to have contained a high concentration of Bilirubin which shows that the blood came from a person who had undergone extreme traumatic stress. However, blood that has this high level of a bile pigment component is blood that has been broken, with large numbers of shattered red blood cells. Shattering of the blood cells releases the fluids from inside the cells, extending the time it takes to coagulate. It coagulates far more slowly because of the bilirubin. In addition, the cloth of the Shroud had been retted in Soapwort, a plant product that is hemolytic (meaning it destroys red blood cells). The cloth was new, so therefore freshly washed with soapwort... thus adding to the breakage of the red blood cells and the release of the cytosol in the cell. This excess bilirubin, which is red and remains red, also causes the dried blood to retain the red color instead of going brown and then black with age.

Would the oil have the capacity to liquefy coagulated blood?

The oil may have had some role in the removal of coagulated blood and allowed for seepage from the wounds. The normal procedure for cleaning the body, living or dead, using oil, is to apply the oil then, using a wooden utensil, scrape the oil and dirt off the body. This also would tend to break the coagulated blood on the smaller wounds and allow seepage.
Frederick T. Zugibe, M.D., Ph.D., Adjunct Associate Professor of Pathology, Columbia University, College of Physicians & Surgeons, N.Y. and Chief Medical Examiner, Rockland County, N.Y., examined this question in his paper The Man Of The Shroud Was Washed

Forgetting all of the other wounds, no one would argue that the scourge wounds were made and clotting begun several hours prior to death. Moreover, most forensic experts agree that the Man of the Shroud shows evidence of rigor mortis because of the bent knees and absence of a neck, therefore indicating that the crucified was dead for some time before being taken down from the cross. Thus, according to the studies of Lavoie's group, these perfectly defined wounds should not have transferred at all. Yet many of the scourge wounds on the Shroud of Turin are extremely distinct corresponding to dumbbell shaped wounds. Even if the clots from these wounds satisfied the time and moisture criteria postulated by Lavoie's group, the shape of the scourge wounds including the bloody areas around the wounds would be indistinct and extremely variable in size and shape depending on the depth of the wound, the angle of the wound, the amount of blood flow, the flow pattern and whether or not clothing was adherent to the wounds. Moreover, even if the dripping sweat of the crucified softened some of the dried blood in areas just outside these wounds, only indistinct and variable-shaped impressions would result. However, if the body was washed, the dried blood around the wounds would be removed causing an oozing of bloody material within the wounds resulting in the production of relatively good impressions of the wound. In order to test this hypothesis, pieces of linen and paper towels were gently touched (not pressed) against wounds from accident victims who lived for several hours following the accident. Relatively no impressions were made. This was repeated after the wounds were rinsed with water and allowed to soak on the wounds for several minutes. Only indistinct bloody impressions were made. The wounds were then washed and this procedure tried again. This resulted in reasonably good impressions of the wounds.

Thank you. This allows me to express this difficulty that I have understanding the shroud:

On one hand we have an image transfer that is similar to photography in that it preserved the aspect ratios of the round form onto a flat surface. This requires that the shroud be nearly flat, and therefore touching only a small percentage of the body, especially on the front.

On the other hand, we have blood seepage from treated wounds that requires direct contact, again, especially on the front. But direct contact would have the potatohead effect, rather than the photographic foreshortening of the round form.

So, is there a disconnect between the image and blood stains? In other words, first let us assume that the body was wrapped after it was washed (for example, in order to transport it into the grave). If the transfer mechanism for blood was direct impression during that period while the body was wrapped, and the transfer mechanism for the image was energy in parallel rays (like photography) at some later point when the shroud was flattened, then the blood stains would appear to hang in the air around the sides of the image.

Conversely, let us assume that the shroud never wrapped the body. The body was washed, placed on top of the bottom part of the shroud, the herbs placed over it and the top of the shroud was nearly flat on top of the herbs. Then the top part of the shoud will have little contact with the blood and will have much less stains than the bottom. Further, whatever blood stains are on the top will be from the parts of the body most likely to touch the shroud, forehead, nose, hands and feet. There will be no blood stains from the sides of the body on either top or bottom of the shroud. On the top, there will be no blood from around the eyes, cheeks, neck, or portions of the stomach near the folded hands.

Third possibility is that some blood images are stains (allowing for chemical hematological examination) and other are of the same mysterious parallel-ray projection or passing-through nature as the whole image. They show wounds in the same way a photograph shows wounds while the photograph itself not being stained with blood. For these images it does not matter if the wound was still seeping with blood; the coagulated blood on these wounds is just another object being on the body as the coins on the eyes, and mysteriously projected onto the shroud.

Is any of that speculation compatible with the image? I remember seeing an enhanced image purporting to show the wounds starkly in red, but I no longer can find it on the Internet, and of course I don’t know how credible that enhanced image was.

Thank you. This allows me to express this difficulty that I have understanding the shroud:

You have identified the some of the inexplicable things associated with the Shroud. We know that the starch coating on the fibrils underneath the blood stains have not been carmelized to form image "pixels" indicating that the blood stains were placed before the image. There for the stains precede the placement of the image.

Let us do some thought experiments, picturing in our minds the three dimensional body laying on the slab. If you will recall, the image fades to obscurity in about 4-5 centimeters body distance to cloth. However, none of the blood stains are visible on the sides of the arms, legs, sides of the thighs and hips, or in the "shadowed" area between the arms and the abdomen. The intensity of the image on the abdomen, thighs, shins and upper feet is about the same, indicating contact or distance equivalence. The chest, nose, forehad and arms, however are distinctly denser in image "pixels" being the higher areas. This would be consistent with the cloth semi-draping, rather than stretched over the body, and touching more than just the highest spots on the body. Note that the blood stains from the scourge marks fade to obscurity BEFORE the image, even though it is reasonable to assume there are more scourge marks on the flanks of the body. It appears that it is only the areas where the cloth may have actually contacted the body where there is any absorbing of blood oozing from the scourge wounds.

Looking at the lance wound in the side, It appears on the image to be placed just below the nipple, an area of the abdomen and chest that is still fairly flat. Even though it may be a couple of centimeters below the high point, the cloth could still have contacted it. Lifting the cloth off the wound would tend not to move the stains very far horizontally in any direction from their apparent original positions. Place your hand so that your fingers are on the mid-point of your chest and notice how close the skin just below your nipple (if you are a male) lies beneath your palm... on me it's about 1 to 1.5 centimeters. It is not outside of the acceptable distance for the draping of the cloth before it spans the space between the chest and the upper arm.

On the dorsal image, the blood flows from the side wound are consistent with contact transfers and dripping blood oozing around the body. By the way, these two images show the differences in the intensities of the blood stains between the back and the front.

I think that the blood is a contact transfer but the image is the result of something that acted at a limited distance.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.