Painting in Sacred Blood (Veronica's Veil Re-discovered)

Catholic Exchange ^ | June 9, 2006 | Michael S. Rose

[NYer]

Almost four centuries after its mysterious disappearance, Fr. Heinrich Pfeiffer reported that he has rediscovered one of Christendom's most intriguing relics: the Veil of Veronica, the cloth with which Jesus wiped His face on the road to Calvary.

Fr. Pfeiffer, a professor of Christian Art History in Rome, found the relic in the Abbey of Manoppello, Italy. The German Jesuit invested 13 years of searching through archives to prove that this is the same cloth that disappeared from the Vatican in 1608.

Manoppello is a small, ancient town in the Abruzzo region of Italy, about 150 miles from Rome in the Apennine Mountains. The Capuchin friary there is appropriately named the Sanctuary of the Holy Face. A piece of stained, pale cloth kept in this tiny village has long been regarded by the Capuchin monks as a sacred icon with wondrous properties.

The story of St. Veronica and her veil appears in various early Christian writings. Most notably, the apocryphal "Acts of Pilate" from the sixth century, identifies Veronica with the hemorrhaging woman who was cured by touching the hem of Jesus' cloak. Veronica is described as a pious matron from Jerusalem, and numbered among the holy women who accompanied our Lord to Calvary.

During the Passion, she is said to have wiped sweat from His brow. Jesus rewarded Veronica for her charity by leaving her an imprint of His face on the "veil." She later traveled to Rome, bringing with her this image of Christ, which was long exposed to public veneration.

The almost transparent white veil measures about 6-1/2 x 9-1/2 inches and bears dark red features of a serene bearded man with long hair and open eyes, patiently enduring suffering. Bruises and other scars are apparent on his forehead. Clotted blood is on his nose, and one pupil is slightly dilated.

The sacred veil is so thin one can easily see through it. In fact, the image becomes invisible depending on the angle from which the cloth is viewed, something that was considered a miracle in itself in medieval times.

Stolen, Sold and Donated

Documented history of the mysterious relic dates back to at least the fourth century. On the occasion of the first known Jubilee year, 1300, we know that the veil was kept in the Vatican Basilica as a popular goal of pilgrims, as it is mentioned in Canto XXXI of Dante's Paradiso. Fr. Pfeiffer believes the sacred relic was stolen during the restoration of the Basilica in the year 1608., when the chapel housing the veil was demolished. Shortly thereafter, the veil appeared in Manoppello.

Ten years later, in 1618, Vatican archivist Giacomo Grimaldi drew up a list of the sacred objects held in the old St. Peter's Basilica. The reliquary containing the Veil of Veronica was on that list, but Grimaldi indicated that the reliquary's crystal glass was broken.

According to records at the monastery written in 1646, the wife of a soldier sold the veil to a nobleman of Manoppello in 1608 in order to ransom her husband from prison. Thirty years later, the nobleman donated the relic to the Capuchins. In 1638, it was placed in a walnut frame adorned in silver and gold between two sheets of glass. It remained in the monastery ever since.

The Same Face as the Shroud

"There are few such objects in history," Fr. Pfeiffer explained to Rome's Zenit News Agency a few years ago. "This is not a painting. We don't know what the material is that shapes the image, but it is the color of blood."

Ultraviolet examinations of the cloth confirm that the image is not paint, and the fibers of the veil do not have any type of color. Thus, it was not woven with dyed fibers. Particularly noteworthy are several small flecks of reddish brown — presumably drops of blood from the wounds caused by the Crown of Thorns.

Enlarged digital photographs of the veil reveal that the image is identical on both sides of the cloth — a feat impossible to achieve by ancient techniques, and extremely difficult to achieve even today. These photographs have also been used to compare the veil with the face on the Shroud of Turin. Striking similarities are apparent: the faces are the same shape and size, both have shoulder-length hair with a tuft on the forehead, the noses are the same length, and the beards match. The only difference is that on the veil the mouth and eyes are open. Those who carried out the tests concluded that the two relics bear the image of the same face, "photographed" at two different times.

For those interested, the Veil of Veronica remains on display at the Capuchin Abbey of Manoppello.

[droichead]

thanks again for your postings. The babel of language is certainly playing a part in the understanding of the Holy Face of Manoppello. For there are almost no english speaking people following the growing amount of literature on this special image. Up to recently almost all the writings and studies have been in either Italian or German (although Polish seems to be catching up fast).

Unfortunately Falcinelli in his article available on the internet which claimed that the Holy Face is a Renaissance work of art seriously confused the issue regarding Chiara Vigo’s assertion on the nature of the fabric of the Holy Face. Part of the problem is that the term “byssus” can mean various types of fine fabric. For this reason I urge that in english we use the term “marine byssus” to clarify when we are talking about fine fabric made from the hairs of a mollusk.

Paul Badde reported in his article that Chiara Vigo, an expert on the weaving of marine byssus, clearly stated while looking at the Holy Face of Manoppello, that the fabric of the Holy Face is marine byssus. The article, and Badde’s later book, would not make sense if Vigo had not said it was marine byssus. There are photographs in the article of Vigo holding a handful of the threads of marine byssus. This article (including photographs) is available in english on the german website www.voltosanto.de Click on the word “zeitschriften” and then scroll down to the image of the magazine article.

Falcinelli’s mistake is understandable but I urgently request that it be corrected by him, and/or by the person who posted the article.

Almost all historians (including Fr. Pfeiffer and Vatican archivists) agree that the story of Veronica is a legendary figure of the late middle ages. As far as I know no one has found any reference to her before this period. Who might have provided the very expensive fabric to use in relation to Jesus is a good question. We do know that according to the Scriptures, in addition to the poor and the ordinary people there were many rich people who were deeply influenced by Jesus and out of love for him would have willingly given much of what they had for him. In addition, most historians today would hold that the cloth now at St. Peter’s in the Vatican is not the same cloth that was displayed as the Veil of Veronica before 1506. The visit of Pope Benedict XVI to Manoppello in 2006 would not have been possible if this was not the case.

I respect your opinions and your questions very much. I would ask you to hold certain judgment about the Holy Face of Manoppello until much more of the literature in German and Italian is available, and until we make sure that what is available now in english is accurate, and that we understand it correctly.

An example regarding our correct understanding of the literature would be Fr. Pfeiffer’s assertion (based on the statement of Chiara Vigo in Badde’s article that “one cannot paint on marine byssus”). I am certain that the meaning of Fr. Pfeiffer’s is not that one cannot put paint on byssus. Rather the meaning is that an artist cannot paint a portrait on marine byssus. From what I understand salt would get in between layers of paint and cause the flaking which would over time ruin any recognizable figure. So as Fr. Pfeiffer has stated it is possible that there is some kind of paint on the Holy Face of Manoppello to highlight some aspect of the image.
From what I understand from the Rector of the Sanctuary of the Holy Face some scientists are doing tests on marine byssus to see if they can confirm or deny this.

Silk screen or block printing is another matter, this is something I had not thought of. It’s possible that other literature in German or Italian addresses this, it is a good question and I will keep this in mind and look for answers to this.

[Swordmaker]

thanks for your open mind. I am perfectly willing to follow the science. It just has to be good science. Are you a member of the Shroud of Turin ping list?

[droichead]

It is a real challenge to my mind to plow through all the literature on the Holy Face that is available only in Italian and German, and now Polish. But I am happy to do it because the majority of the information available in english on the Holy Face is at best only partial and misleading, and at worst seriously flawed. I am convinced that all english speaking people making certain statements about the Holy Face of Manoppello will have their minds blown when they are able to see and read all that is now available in German, Italian and Polish languages.

No I am not a member of the Shroud of Turin ping list. Thank you for asking. I am still learning to navigate Freerepublic.