Posted on 07/28/2019 6:02:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
In an imaginary “ranking” of Christian topics that elicit the most fervent discussions, Jesus Christ is No. 1. But near the top is the Shroud of Turin — believed by millions of Christians to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus. This “ranking” was inspired by you — Townhall readers who wrote over 500 impassioned comments in response to my July 21 piece, “Shroud of Turin: New Test Concludes 1988 ‘Medieval Hoax’ Dating Was a Fraud.”
I purposely read all your comments to gain insight into my role as an adviser and fundraiser for a groundbreaking exhibition about the Shroud of Turin at the Museum of the Bible in Washington D.C. This spectacular museum, among the largest and highest rated in the city, is located only three blocks from the Capitol. And just prior to the January 20, 2021, presidential inauguration is when this high-tech Shroud exhibit is scheduled to open.
Threaded throughout hundreds of your responses about all aspects of the Shroud was one overarching theme summarized by these three comments:
“Anyone who requires physical evidence to underpin their faith doesn’t understand the concept of faith.”
“JESUS CHRIST died for all. HE is what is important. Making such a fuss about this piece of cloth is a distraction from HIS work of SALVATION.”
“I respectfully submit that the only ‘relic’ which really matters is the one which was left us on that first Easter morning: The tomb is empty! He is Risen! He is Risen indeed! Alleluia!”
Of course, “He is Risen” is also the foundation of my Christian faith, (made slightly more complicated by having been born Jewish). But I feel compelled to discuss and explore the comment that reads in part, “…such a fuss about this piece of cloth...”
And my response is simple: The Shroud of Turin exists because HE exists. An answer that echoes what God said to Moses, “I Am Who I Am. Say this to the people of Israel: I Am has sent me to you” (Exodus 3:14).
Thus, the existence of the Shroud of Turin raises two questions that I will attempt to address: First, what exactly is the Shroud? And second, a deeper dive into “Why does the cloth exist?”
The Shroud of Turin is a 14.5-by-3.5-foot linen cloth with a linear front to back mirror image of a crucified man. The Shroud has the distinction of being the most studied artifact in the world, yet the cloth’s numerous mysteries remained unexplained by modern science.
At this moment the Shroud lies in a fireproof box in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, as it has continuously since 1578. (But secretly relocated between 1939 and 1946 when Italian authorities feared Hitler was seeking possession.)
Dating the Shroud has been controversial and the subject of my July 21 piece.
Among Shroud historians, there is no dispute that in 1352, over 200 years before the Shroud was housed in Turin, Geoffrey DeCharney displayed the cloth in Lirey, France marking the beginning of the Shroud’s documented "modern" dating.
There is also much circumstantial Shroud evidence through art, artifacts, and coins that pre-dates 1352. Moreover, scientifically verified botanical evidence found on the cloth in the form of pollen, dust, flowers, and even the weave and type of linen traces the Shroud back to first-century Jerusalem.
The cloth with its mysterious properties has survived wars, invasions and the ravages of time including numerous fires — most recently in 1997 at its home cathedral in Turin.
Most harrowing was the 1532 fire in Chambéry, France. Miraculously the entire cloth was not destroyed but left those distinctive linear markings along both sides of the Shroud that we see today. Hard to imagine, but the linen cloth was stored in a silver box, folded in 48 layers, when drops of molten silver burned through the cloth’s outer folded edges.
The point is, against all the odds, the Shroud exists. And, as stated earlier, because He exists. There is also a significant Bible-based reason found in the Gospel of John known as “Doubting Thomas” (John 20:24-31).
But first, a “guest” who will explain this passage needs a proper introduction:
It turns out that the many Townhall readers who commented about not needing the Shroud’s “physical evidence to underpin their faith,” represent a large swath of Christian believers. I learned this when asking Russ Breault— my fellow Shroud exhibit team colleague, and a world-renowned Shroud expert and speaker — if he had experienced similar attitudes after over 30 years of hosting his popular “Shroud Encounters” to sell-out crowds.
Breault replied:
“I get that statement all the time! When someone says, ‘I don't need the Shroud for my faith,’ I usually say, ‘That is fantastic! But that doesn't mean the Shroud was not meant for someone else.’ ”
Breault continued: “In the Doubting Thomas story, Jesus pronounced a blessing on those who ‘believe yet have not seen,’ but Jesus did not condemn Thomas for his unbelief. In fact, a week after the Resurrection, Jesus appeared a second time, and the first person he spoke to was Thomas, who was not there to witness Jesus’ first appearance. Jesus then quotes Thomas' words back to him, ‘Thomas, thrust your hand into my side and place your fingers into my nail wounds and be not faithless but believe.’
At this point, Thomas — forever known as "Doubting Thomas" — makes the strongest profession of faith in the New Testament saying, "My Lord and my God." Then Jesus pronounced a blessing on those who can believe without seeing. So we are blessed if we can believe without seeing, but we are not cursed if we can't get there without some additional evidence.
Therefore, perhaps the Shroud is a silent witness to the world offering all of humanity the same opportunity Jesus gave to Thomas. In some proverbial sense by looking at the Shroud, we too can thrust our hand into His side and place our fingers into His nail wound and find our faith in the process.”
Thank you, Russ! And now my final thoughts for Townhall commenters.
If blessed with great faith, you are free to ignore or downplay the image on the Shroud showing Christ’s great suffering and victory over death. Yet, take comfort in knowing that the Shroud is there to supplement or reinforce the faith of others while potentially witnessing to the ever-increasing number of Doubting Thomases found throughout the world.
In the end, I believe that the Shroud exists as proof of God’s greatest gift to mankind —the Lord Jesus Christ — who lives and reigns forever and ever. Alleluia!
(Now, let the comments begin!)
“Just because the church is to uphold the truth, does not mean it is the truth itself.”
Of course not, for the Truth is God Himself. Yet He instituted a Church to preach His commandments and teachings, to be representatives of His authority on Earth.
Christ did not write a single word down as far as we are aware, nor did He command the Apostles to write down a single word of the New Testament; rather, He commanded them to teach all nations:
“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Matthew 28:18-20
See here the warrant and commission of the Apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s Church. He received from His Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, He sent them (even as his Father sent Him) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that He may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, He promised to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ Himself, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life?
Now, to this you object about the current state of the religion in Rome. To which I wholeheartedly agree, for the sect that currently professes to be the Catholic Church is not so, and hasn’t been since the Second Vatican Council in the early 1960s, when it promulgated doctrines on ecumenism, religious liberty, and religious freedom that contradicted prior Church teaching, Tradition, and Scripture. Since then, it has only gone off the rails even further into the depths of Modernism, demonstrating none of the protections of the Holy Ghost. And how could it be so, for a sect that preaches heresy?
It was the traditional teaching of the Church that certain sins sever one automatically from her fold, due to their nature: among these include apostasy (a wholesale abandonment of the Christian faith), schism (the intentional disruption of ecclesiastical unity), and heresy (to disbelieve or withdraw from any of the truths of Faith, such as the Trinity or the Incarnation).
The gaggle of public heretics and apostates in Rome is not the Catholic Church of the ages, regardless of what the rest of the world may believe or profess, for public heretics have judged themselves without need of recognition by anyone else.
Yeah, that's a pretty big change from what the RCC used to say about Christians.
Just as warm and social as always. Oh, and humble as well.
Pretty sure that massive ego of yours is a mortal sin in some capacity.
Good morn.
Only point I have to make just from the little bit I read is that there’s both a visible and invisible church. In Scripture the ekklesia refers to an assembly of believers; that includes both visible congregations with both wheat and tares and the entirety of all believers stretching across time.
I’ll get to the Scripture that proves that when I return.
No offense but I’m going to have to delay a response to the rest of it for awhile. Even without reading all your post I can tell that this requires a great deal of time, and my friend and mentor just got put into the hospital because of a heart attack. Gotta take care of that before an Internet debate.
...hopefully I remember to come back to this.
You cut my reply in half to present me (falsely) as unacquainted with Scripture.
Nope. I quoted the relevant sentence in its entirety.
You are the one who made the statement out of context.
I find increasing slander and bigotry against Catholicism and Catholics on Shroud Threads.
My, my....some Roman Catholics have the thinnest of skins.
Perhaps these open threads are not for you. You might find more agreeable souls on the caucus threads where about 2-4 comments are made. There you can post in the echo chamber.
Have you ever looked at pictures of tachrichim?
"Would that be an admission that without the Shroud, and the relics such as the splinters from the Cross, and the bones of the apostles and other physical evidence you would have no compunction to believe that Jesus existed???"
Not at all. I was merely hoping to inspire some thought as to how exactly we got the Bible in its current form, as that is how most people these days know of Christ's existence.
One more thing before I rush off.
Sola scriptura doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Just means that Scripture is sufficient for knowledge of salvation, infallible, and the supreme authority in matters of faith.
“Pretty sure that massive ego of yours is a mortal sin in some capacity.”
Pretty sure you’re just proving the point I made in my tagline.
I see The Rules still apply.
If you quote Unam Sanctam to a RC most will fall all over themselves to tell you it doesn’t mean what it says....that they have to be subject to their own pope...especially this one.
Both sentences were relevant; the Scripture says that in the Eucharist we celebrate /proclaim / remember the Lord’s Death until he returns.
That implies recalling His Death is a good thing.
Therefore, the Shroud is not an idol, but an aid to devotion.
Trolling *fail* on your part.
There is no "implying". The Lord's Supper is when we proclaim His death and remember His sacrifice for us.
Therefore, the Shroud is not an idol, but an aid to devotion.
The Shroud has nothing to do with the Lord's Supper. Nothing.
That's why I said context is your friend in these matters.
You're wrongly attempting to link the two together.
Trolling *fail* on your part.
It is usually, though not always, the Roman Catholic who first resorts to the personal attack and/or profanity when the argument goes against them.
Laughing in your face.
In theory, that’s what it means.
But in practice, not so much.
And the “not so much” includes both cutting off current practice because “it’s not in Scripture” and disallowing things on Scripture because they’re “not for today.”
I do not deny those past papal teachings.
What I **do** deny is that the current sect in Rome is the Catholic Church. It hasn't been since the Second Vatican Council, where it promulgated doctrine and teachings that contradicted past Church teaching on matters such as ecclesiology, ecumenism, religious liberty, and religious freedom. It has only spiraled further downward into Modernism and heresy, as we see today with Jorge Bergoglio, aka Antipope Francis.
The moment that sect promulgated Vatican II and its various heresies, it lost any right to call itself the Catholic Church.
To quote the last true Pope, Pius XII, from his encyclical Mystici Corporis:
22. Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” 17 As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. 18 And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered — so the Lord commands — as a heathen and a publican. 19 It follows that those are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.
23. Nor must one imagine that the Body of the Church, just because it bears the name of Christ, is made up during the days of its earthly pilgrimage only of members conspicuous for their holiness, or that it consists only of those whom God has predestined to eternal happiness. it is owing to the Savior’s infinite mercy that place is allowed in His Mystical Body here below for those whom, of old, He did not exclude from the banquet.20 For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy. Men may lose charity and divine grace through sin, thus becoming incapable of supernatural merit, and yet not be deprived of all life if they hold fast to faith and Christian hope, and if, illumined from above, they are spurred on by the interior promptings of the Holy Spirit to salutary fear and are moved to prayer and penance for their sins.
24. Let every one then abhor sin, which defiles the mystical members of our Redeemer; but if anyone unhappily falls and his obstinacy has not made him unworthy of communion with the faithful, let him be received with great love, and let eager charity see in him a weak member of Jesus Christ. For, as the Bishop of Hippo remarks, it is better “to be cured within the Church’s community than to be cut off from its body as incurable members.” 21 “As long as a member still forms part of the body there is no reason to despair of its cure; once it has been cut off, it can be neither cured nor healed.” 22
Doubling down will only dig you in deeper in the more.
Here, let me throw you a bag of kitty litter for traction.
(Liberals argue like you do:”I’m right because I say so, which proves I was right.”)
-—Therefore, the Shroud is not an idol, but an aid to devotion.-—
An aid to devotion....... yes but is it authentic relic or a cloth cleverly produced to incite devotiation?
That is the root of the question. The only rational answer is that you must have faith in faith.
Doubling down will only dig you in deeper in the mire.
Here, let me throw you a bag of kitty litter for traction.
(Liberals argue like you do:”I’m right because I say so, which proves I was right.”)
Autocorrect fail on “mire.”
Don’t have time to respond.
But we may have a point of contact here; or several.
More later.
The Scriptures in question were the Jewish Old Testament.
To quote my response to Luircin:
xxxx
There is a distinction to be made between Sacred Scripture and the Bible. Namely, that Sacred Scripture consists of all inspired writings, and that the Bible is merely the official collection of these inspired writings into one definitive list or tome.
Thus, it is true that the Old Testament Scriptures existed before the Catholic Church (which holds true of all those who profess to be Christian, for that matter), much like it was true that the inspired writings of the New Testament all existed prior to the aforementioned councils (notwithstanding the fact that the Church existed before a single word of the New Testament was written). Yet, the collection of all these works into one ‘biblia’, to be held as definitively inspired to all of Christendom, was done by the Church.
Hence why I can claim, with the backing of history, that the Church existed before the Bible, that she made the Bible, that she selected its books, that she preserved it and handed it down.
xxxx
Sola Scriptura does not follow from this excerpt of Paul's second letter to Timothy. Every part of Holy Scripture is certainly profitable for all these ends; but, if we would have the whole rule of Christian faith and practice, we must not be content with those Scriptures, which Timothy knew from his infancy, that is, with the Old Testament alone: nor yet with the New Testament, without taking along with it the traditions of the Apostles, and the interpretation of the Church, to which the Apostles delivered both the book, and the true meaning of it. For as Peter attests in the last chapter of his second epistle:
[14] Wherefore, dearly beloved, waiting for these things, be diligent that you may be found before Him unspotted and blameless in peace. [15] And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
[16] As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction. [17] You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness. [18] But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and unto the day of eternity. Amen.
Scripture can be destructive to one's salvation if you interpret it wrongly. Hence the need for a Divinely-authorized teacher, that Christ would be with until the consummation of the world.
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.