The Shroud of Turin - Research Paper Example

? Shroud of Turin School This paper looks at the history of the Shroud of Turin and all the controversies that havebeen associated with the Shroud. And since the history of the Shroud of Turin is too broad, this paper focuses only on the significant events in the history of the Shroud of Turin. The paper also reviews and explores the debates of both those who hold the view that the shroud of Turin is indeed the authentic cloth that wrapped Jesus Christ during his burial, and those who hold contrary view and dismiss the Shroud of Turin as a medieval forgery meant to win more Christian converts. Shroud of Turin The Shroud of Turin is a linen cloth that bears the image of a tortured and crucified person and that is believed by many people to be the actual cloth that wrapped Jesus Christ during his burial. The authenticity of the Shroud of Turin has been a subject of a very controversial debate; the proponents of the Shroud of Turin argue that the Shroud of Turin is indeed the real cloth that Jesus Christ of Nazareth was wrapped in during his burial, while the critiques of the Shroud of Turin on the other hand dismiss the Shroud of Turin as a medieval Christian hoax meant to win Christianity more converts (Stapylton, 2003). This paper looks at the history of the Shroud of Turin, and also at the controversies that characterize the history of the Shroud. And since the History of the Shroud of Turin is too broad to be covered in this paper, the paper focuses on the highlights of the history of the Shroud of Turin. At the end of the paper, an objective conclusion is made based on the history and the debates on the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. For better analysis of the history of the Shroud of Turin, the history of the Shroud of Turin can be divided into two periods. The first period is before the year 1350, and the second period is after the year 1350. Researchers are agreed that the year 1350 is the beginning of the documented history of the Shroud of Turin (Shroud History, n.d.). But the period before 1350 is quite controversial; some scholars are of the view that the Shroud of Turin existed even before 1350 while other scholars, basing their evidence on Carbon dating, believe that the origin of the Shroud of Turin can be traced in the medieval period. But before we get into the debate of the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, let us first look at the documented history of the Shroud of Turin. The following are the significant events in the history of the Shroud of Turin as documented by the Shroud Historian Ian Wilson (1978). According to the documented history of the Shroud, Geoffrey de Charny, a French knight, is mentioned as the person who was first found with the Shroud of Turin (Wilson, 1978). In the year 1349, Geoffrey had written to pope Clement V1 expressing his wish to build a church in honour of the Holy Trinity. Geoffrey had been a prisoner of the English and he claimed that the Holy Trinity had miraculously saved him from the English prison. The pope gave him the permission to build the church and Geoffrey built it at Lirey in France. Geoffrey is said to have been in possession of the Shroud of Turin during this time and he kept the Shroud in the Church that he built at Lirey. Some people have argued that Geoffrey had got the Shroud from Constantinople; while other people disagree with this view (Shroud History, n.d). The first public exposition of the Shroud of Turin was done in 1355 at the church that Geoffrey had built at Lirey in France. Bishop Henri, however, was quite sceptical of the Shroud and he ordered that the expositions be halted. The expositions were halted and the Shroud was hidden away. In the year 1356, Geoffrey and his wife died, but the Shroud remained in the family of Geoffrey. In the year 1389, King Charles V1 of France requested the bailiff of Troyes to seize the Shroud at lirey and deposit in another church in Lirey waiting further decisions on the Shroud from the king (Shroud History, n.d). The dean of the church at Lirey, however, resisted the taking a way of the Shroud by the bailiff and the shroud remained in the church at Lirey. In the same year 1389, the bishop of Troyes, Pierre d’Arcis wrote to the anti-pope Clement V11 appealing to him to give permission for the believers to venerate the Shroud. The pope however strictly warned the bishop against veneration of the Shroud, and the pope even threatened excommunication should the bishop persist in advocating for the veneration of the cloth. Sometime later, however, in the year 1390, the Papal bull granted indulgencies on those who venerated the Shroud. In the year 1418, the Shroud was transferred from Lirey to Humbert for safe-keeping, and in the year 1471, the Shroud was transferred to Verceli. Two years later, the Shroud was transferred from Verceli to Turin. In nutshell, this is how Turin became the official place where the Shroud is kept, and that is how the Shroud came to have the name Shroud of Turin, named after Turin, the place where it is kept up to the present. Controversy Surrounding the Shroud of Turin The main controversy surrounding the Shroud of Turin revolves around the authenticity of the Shroud. The main question is, is the Shroud of Turin really the real cloth that Jesus Christ was wrapped in during his burial? Is the image on the Shroud of Turin really the image of Jesus Christ? The answers to these questions are quite controversial and scholars have held different opinions on the issue. Let us look both at the arguments of the proponents and the critiques of the Shroud of Turin. Refutations of the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin The critiques of the Shroud of Turin contend that the Shroud of Turin was a medieval forgery for some selfish ends (Cameron, 1980). Bishop Pierre D’ Arcis of Troy is one of the earliest people with the view that the Shroud of Turin was a painted forgery. However, a microscopic look at the image of Turin has shown no trace of brush strokes. This fact therefore shows that the Shroud of Turin cannot possibly be a painted work. The other strong argument that the critiques of the Shroud of Turin use is based on the Carbon dating test on the Shroud of Turin that was done in the year 1988. In this test, samples of the Shroud of Turin were sent to the universities of Oxford, Zurich and Arizona. After the Carbon dating test, the researchers in these universities were in agreement that the shroud of Turin dated in the medieval period; none of the research found different results. The critiques of the Shroud of Turin therefore use the Carbon dating findings to refute the claim that the Shroud of Turin was the actual cloth in which Jesus Christ was wrapped in during his burial in the first century. The second scientific finding that the critiques of the Shroud of Turin use is the finding of STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project). STURP was composed of distinguished American scholars and scientists (Breault, n.d.). The STURP research concentrated on the image on the Shroud of Turin, the scientists carried out a forensic test on the Shroud of Turin image to find out whether or not the image on the Shroud of Turin was genuine; the scientists also sought to know how the image was made and its composition. The forensic test was painstaking and thorough. In their findings, STURP concluded that the image on the Shroud of Turin was caused by dehydration, oxidation and dehydration of the linen cloth by unidentified process (Lannone, n.d.). The scientists also found out that the image was coloured with Sepia paint. The critiques of the Shroud of Turin therefore used this scientific finding of STURP to argue that the Shroud of Turin is not the actual cloth with which Jesus Christ was wrapped in during his burial. Argument’s in support of the view the Shroud of Turin is Authentic One of the main claim that the proponents of the Shroud of Turin uses to support their views is that, although some scientific experiments shows that the Shroud of Turin may not have been authentic, none of the scientific findings has conclusively answered the question of how the shroud of Turin was made (Lannone, n.d). The proponents of the shroud of Turin also make counter arguments to show the flaws in the scientific findings that tend to disapprove the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. To counter the claims made through the Carbon 14 test, the proponents of the Shroud of Turin contend that the sample of cloth that was used in the Carbon 14 dating did not constitute the original part of the Shroud of Turin This view is supported by the views of Dr. Ray Rogers, one of the lead scientists in the Carbon 4 dating. According to Dr. Rogers, the cloth sample that was used in the Carbon 14 dating was part of the cloth that was re-woven during the middle ages (Lannone, n.d). This fact therefore shows that the carbon 14 dating results were false. To counter the findings of STURP, the proponents of the Shroud of Turin uses the findings of Dr .Baima Ballone.Dr. Ballone conducted a research in Turin on the red colourings on the Shroud of Turin, according to his findings, the red colourings on the Shroud is actually made up of human male blood of type AB(Lannone, n.d) . This test of Ballone was confirmed in the US. This test therefore shows that the findings of the STURP that the red colouring on the Shroud of Turin was made of paint, is false. The proponents of the Shroud of Turin also argue that the Shroud of Turin is consistent with the biblical description of the cloth that was used to wrap Jesus Christ during his burial. The New Testament says that a “Sindon” (Shroud), was purchased by Joseph of Arimathea and used to wrap Jesus Christ during his burial (Lannone, n.d) l. The proponents of the Shroud of Turin, therefore, argue that the Shroud of Turin is consistent with the biblical description of Jesus burial, and this shows that the Shroud is authentic. In conclusion, although there are strong arguments on both the side of the proponents and critiques of the Shroud of Turin, none of the arguments seem strong enough to make a conclusive judgement on the issue. The main weakness of the arguments in refutation of the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin is that, none of the argument can give a credible account of how the Shroud was made. On the arguments in support of the Shroud of Turin, the arguments also do not conclusively prove that the Shroud of Turin is genuine, and the real cloth that Jesus Christ was wrapped in during his burial. The Shroud of Turin therefore remains a mystery to us and there is a need for more research on the Shroud. References Breault, R. ( n.d.) The Shroud of Turin- Why So controversial? Web. Cameron, A. (1980). The Sceptic and the Shroud. England, London: King's College Inaugural Lecture.Print. Lannone, J.C. (n.d.) The Shroud of Turin- Evidence it is Authentic. Web. Shroud History.Web Stapylton, A. (2003).Holy Shroud of Turin. USA: Barnes.Print Wilson, L. ( 1978). The Turin Shroud. USA: Doubleday.Print Read More