The Holy Shroud of Turin is either the negative image of the authentic story of Christ’s passion and death, and probably of His resurrection as well. Or it is a medieval (1250-1390) re-enactment copy of the same thing. There are hardly any alternatives to its scientific interpretation, though novel ones may arise in the future.
It is recorded outside Jerusalem before 50 AD, in Edessa/Sanliurfa in eastern Turkey about 590 AD, and was strongly believed to be the real thing. The same in Constantinople from 950 to 1204 AD, in the Pharos Chapel of the imperial palace; and occasionally shown at the Marian Chapel of Blachernae. The same at Lirey in northeast France around 1355, at Geneva and at Nice in the 15th century, and in several long peregrinations in eastern France and northwest Italy, at Chambery in Savoy until about 1578, and in Turin ever since then until today. During World War II it was kept for some years in an abbey at Montevergine in southern Italy for safe-keeping. At the end of the war it was returned to its purpose-built Guarini chapel in Turin.
Radiocarbon 14 examinations by laboratories at Oxford, Zurich and Tucson in Arizona in 1988 established otherwise. They examined a one-inch square corner of the Shroud, which had been repeatedly handled by human hands, affected by fire and smoke, by human sweat and mucus and otherwise contaminated. Hence they were studying a wrong sample, with a damaging scenario, and were bound to come up with skewed dates for the Shroud.
Ian Wilson explains these flaws expertly and exhaustively in The Shroud, Bantam Books, Transworld Publishers, London UK , 2010.
Many people are taken in by the erroneous medieval dates.
Carbon 14 is nevertheless quite reliable in many other archaeological applications, but in the case of the Shroud something went seriously wrong.
So the claimed dates 1260-1390 are just a theory, which can, with due study, be corrected and dismissed.
We are back to 30 AD and the time of Christ’s passion and death, his flagellation or scourging, his crowning with a circlet of thorns, and his crucifixion, and ensuing death, for about two days – otherwise the Shroud would be contaminated by signs of putrefaction, which is not the case.
In death His eyes are closed. Miraculously, his negative image appeared on the Shroud. This appears incredible, but was to Him nevertheless possible, just like His Resurrection which we celebrate, and which He had foretold.
Sceptics, cynics and unbelievers will not believe a word of this, both for allegedly scientific, and for spiritual reasons. Very often, those who believe will not say so. The Vatican authorities shy away from stating that the Shroud definitely bears the marks of Christ, for psychological reasons, and for reasons of security.
The Shroud was saved in the nick of time in the Guarini Chapel’s great fire in Turin in 1997, possibly ascribed to arson. If this was the case, it is probable that someone was not burning a medieval fake, but the real thing.
Hence, believing in the Shroud’s authenticity is a challenging proposition.
Divine Providence has created the Shroud to confound its observers and researchers. Its picture is hidden in a negative image. And it had to take 19 centuries, and the invention of Daguerro-type photography in another negative to reveal its real picture, in an astonishing positive image. In history, since 1898, we are the first viewers to see its real image. Believers will accept the simple evidence in their hearts. Unbelievers will disbelieve and go away, bringing up all sorts of complicated theories.
The vital question is ‘how does a negative image of a dead human body get created, if not by some miracle?’ No other theories appear to explain this phenomenon.
The authenticity of the Shroud is a challenging proposition indeed!
Bernard Vassallo
Swieqi