A faded relic of Christendom reappears

The Roman Catholic Church is weathering another sex scandal, but it is impossible to tell here, where the faint image of a bearded man on a yellowing linen sheet provides the moment, if brief, for pilgrims to declare and reaffirm their faith. For some, it does not matter if the Shroud of Turin is authentic. It is the shared spiritual experience that counts most.

“You can counteract with gestures what’s happening in the church,” said Davide Donato, 23, an architecture student who took an overnight train from Reggio Calabria in southern Italy to see the shroud on Thursday. That night he was taking an overnight train back. “These gestures affirm what you believe in, what that basis of faith is.”

Ten years after the shroud last went on display, nearly two million people have made reservations for a timed glimpse of the religious object (five minutes on weekdays, three on weekends, depending on the bookings, though the labyrinthine line can take well over an hour).

Read it all.

Posted in * Christian Life / Church Life, * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, * Religion News & Commentary, Church History, Death / Burial / Funerals, Europe, Other Churches, Parish Ministry, Religion & Culture, Roman Catholic

2 comments on “A faded relic of Christendom reappears

  1. IchabodKunkleberry says:

    Even if it’s just a clever fake, it will have no affect on my faith.
    However, I’ve always remembered a comment made years ago, which
    ran something like this :

    “If it’s not a fake, then it is by far the most precious things on this
    planet”.

    Exaggeration perhaps, but not by very much.

    I find it interesting that 21st century researchers still encounter
    such difficulty in explaining the image on the shroud, given its origin
    in a pre-industrial and technologically primitive era.

    Another interesting “angle” is its ownership by the papacy. From
    what I’ve read, it was filched ca. 1204 A.D. from Constantinople by
    French crusaders of the 3rd ( ? ) Crusade who happened to
    be passing through town, and decided it would be a good idea
    to plunder the city and “stick it” to the Orthodox as a result
    of the bitter split between the Greek and Latin Churches which
    had erupted 150 years previously.

  2. Ross says:

    It was the Fourth Crusade that sacked Constantinople, and the story behind that is considerably more involved than a desire to “stick it” to the Orthodox. (Also, the tale comes with an optional Evil Venetian Conspiracy component, which you can add or not to suit your taste.)

    If the Wikipedia article on the Shroud is to be trusted (you may take the standard Wikipedia disclaimer as read here) then the notion that the Shroud was part of the loot from Constantinople is controversial. But then, so is most everything else about the Shroud.