The home page of the Shroud Expo website now reads:
‘Thank you Royal Oak, Michigan. San Antonio, Texas is our new stop” Buy ANYTIME Tickets online for the incoming Exposition in San Antonio, Texas. ANYTIME Tickets will be for sale until 5 days prior to inauguration. Take advantage of this offer before it is too late. ANYTIME Ticket for sale at $ 12.00.
Taking a look at the ticket sale page, it looks like the exposition will run from November 13 to January 31, 2015. It is open every day, even Christmas Day, from 10:00 am to 8:00 pm. The guided tour takes 55 minutes.
Do check out the website:
Believers and non-believers, men and women will see this Exposition that touches the soul, awakens the heart and challenges the intelligence
The story never told
It is, in fact, the single most studied artifact in human history, and we know more about it today than we ever have before. And yet, the controversy still rages.
The visitor walks through 12 chambers through the history of the object most studied: The Shroud of Turin. From the finding of the Shroud and its hidden negative, the visitor will see and discover the history, science, controversy, and facts surrounding the Shroud of Turin.
The scientific response to the possible resurrection of the body of Jesus Christ.
More than 50 original pieces
Original pieces that allow the visitor to understand for themselves the history behind the Shroud.
Art, History and Science
Historical objects from the First to the Nineteenth Century such a codex, coins and several other pieces collected over a long study are in display, taking the visitor though an interaction of history and modern science, …… a journey about the man in the Shroud.
The exposition allows the visitor to be part of a unique experience showcasing a relic from the Eighteenth Century with a piece of the Shroud, sealed by Pope Benedict XIV (1740-1758).
All visitors receive an Audio Guide to tour the Exposition. Visitors may choose among several languages: English, Spanish, French, Russian, Albanian, Arabic, Assyrian Aramaic, Polish, Portuguese, and Rumanian. The audio guide has a duration of about 55 minute duration.
The exposition offer visitors a high quality printed catalogue. This book allows visitors to relieve the magic of the twelve chambers of the exposition. For those not able to see the exposition, is a perfect introduction to history, science and the man in the Shroud.
Catalogue is available in English and Spanish.
I like to think that all we do in studying the shroud and talking and writing
about it finds its most important expression in voices like this one.
On Tuesday this week, Tim Lasiuta wrote about the shroud in the local Innisfail Province newspaper. Innisfail is a small agricultural town, midpoint between Calgary and Edmonton in Alberta. The population is just shy of 8,000 people:
The Shroud of Turin is a true mystery of the ages.
Whether or not you believe it is or is not the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, whether you dismiss it as medieval fake or a roughly 2,000-year-old piece of linen from the Jerusalem area, its existence makes you take a stand.
Last week, my wife and I went to St. Vladimir Ukrainian Catholic Church in Red Deer to see the venerated Shroud of Turin, or at least the ninth copy in North America, and the experience was amazing.
[ . . . ]
Having seen the copy first-hand, I can say there are some things you need to experience in life.
You just never know how you will respond.
Ninth copy refers to one of nine copies of the shroud Pope Benedict XVI approved and individually blessed for display in tours around the world.
It took nearly 17 years after our direct examination of the cloth before the
scientific evidence actually convinced me of the shroud’s authenticity.
– Barrie Schwortz
As David V. Barrett reports today in the Catholic Herald, an Expert dismisses historian’s claim that Turin Shroud was made for medieval ritual:
. . . Schwortz, an expert in imaging and the official documenting photographer of STURP, dismisses Mr Freeman’s claims.
He told the Catholic Herald: “I have seen copies of the shroud (commissioned by the Savoy and other royal families) made by artists allowed to view the actual cloth that look very little like the shroud. It is not an easy image to reproduce. I have examined, studied and lectured on the shroud for nearly 38 years yet would have great difficulty in describing the image on the cloth in writing. So variations in early written descriptions or artistic copies doesn’t seem like very convincing evidence against authenticity. And there are many early coins and artworks that appear to have directly and faithfully copied the image on the shroud. Perhaps that is more a testament to the quality of the artists involved and the difficulties one encounters when attempting to duplicate the shroud’s image.”
Mr Schwortz referred to the scientific evidence that is “the basis for my opinion that the shroud cannot be an artwork. STURP’s data provided empirical evidence to that effect, although the sceptics of the world continue to deny it”.
He continued: “Remember that I am Jewish (not Messianic), and it took nearly 17 years after our direct examination of the cloth before the scientific evidence actually convinced me of the shroud’s authenticity. It was the science that did it.”
No Dan Porter, I am not a small boy playing with flour, and your continued attempts to infantilize do you no credit whatsoever. Nor does your attempt to block free speech. Nor does your tolerance of trolls on that site of yours who specialize in making character attacks.
Go boil your head, Dan Porter. I’m heartily sick of you and your tedious popgun attacks,
Since I offended you Colin, I apologize. I have removed the picture from the blog posting. It was not my intention to insult you with the picture. No one, as I imagined it, would think you are like a small boy playing with flour. In fact, I’ve been intrigued by your experiments and have said so. I was merely injecting a bit of humor into the posting, or so I thought.
Sometimes I use a picture to make a point. I did so long ago with a picture of Don Quixote attacking a windmill because that is how I saw what you were doing at the time. You have repeatedly expressed your displeasure about that picture. In that case I said nothing. The picture was an editorial stance no different than my use of an ostrich with his head in the sand to characterize Stephen Jones’ comment that he doesn’t know about some of the shroud news because he will not look at my blog and has not done so since May.
You say I am trying to block free speech. No, I’m not. You have made 1,461 comments in this blog (18 after you switched to another ISP). I have discarded 2 comments by you and edited the contents of another 6. All but one were because of insults. One that I discarded had the single word ‘bye’ in it and was redundant. I will put that one back. I have periodically pre-moderated your comments when you started dishing out excessively insulting remarks and then opened up comments again usually in a day or two.
People have left this blog because of insults. They have mentioned you. I have tried to stick to some principles. Anyone should be able to comment. Right now, I have a list of 4 people who are blacklisted because they have trolled the site, been excessively insulting to others or used excessively anti-Catholic rhetoric. You are not on that list.
This blog is not a public blog. Even so, I try to be fair, balanced and accommodating to everyone. But, like a newspaper, I don’t have to publish every letter to the editor. Is that blocking free speech? No, it is not. Not good enough? Well . . . you do have that corner in Hyde Park and you have your blogs.
There are no trolls on this site “who specialize in making character attacks.” And this is a picture of me boiling my head.
Oh what a tangled website we weave,
When first we start with what we believe!*
* With apologies to Sir Walter Scott
When asked if he would be publishing more about Charles Freeman’s recent article, Stephen Jones in a comment replied, “Sorry, but I have bigger fish to fry than Freeman.”
He needs, he explained, to finish his series, "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker" and complete:
. . . "The Servant of the Priest," which is unexpectedly very important) (e.g the Shroud (sindon) was not in the empty tomb but the risen Jesus took it with Him and gave it to "the servant of the priest," as recorded in the early 2nd century "Gospel of the Hebrews, who was either: a) Malchus (Jn 18:10); b) Peter (confused by a copyist error); or more likely c) John (who tradition records was a priest and is supported by the New Testament but too complex to give in this comment), and is supported by John knowing the name of the High Priest’s servant Malchus (see above), and being known to the High Priest, the High Priest’s servant girl and having easy and authoritative entry into the High Priest’s house (Jn 18:15-16); and therefore John may have even been a servant in the High Priest’s household, and his code name (in that early era of persecution was "the servant of the priest).
Too complex? I’ll wait.
Back to the subject of Charles’ article; I would like to see Jones rewrite and publish his criticism of Freeman’s article without the poisoning of the well and the defense of the hacker theory. Both of those things damage the posting’s credibility as an otherwise fairly good analysis.
the Shroud is a fascinating conundrum.
There is an interesting posting from IlFattoQuotidiano.it / BLOG / di Marco Bella, which, by the way, Google Translate chooses to tell us is a posting by Mark Beautiful and Bing Translate tells us is by Marco Nice.
Other than that, Google seems to translate most of the page fairly well beginning with the title. Sindone di Torino: tra storia e pseudoscienza becomes Shroud of Turin: history and pseudo-science. Take your pick.
(Bing Translator may do a better job. (It only works for me if I click on Bing Translator and then paste in the URL http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2014/10/28/sindone-torino-storia-pseudoscienza/1175434/ Bing give the title as Shroud of Turin: between history and pseudoscience.
With technical details out of the way, we note that:
Ours [that is Mark Beautiful’s or Marco Nice’s or Marco Bella’s] is a country that faced with irrefutable evidence (such as the carbon 14 dating) doesn’t want to resign. . . .
[ . . . ]
And also of the shroud we continue to discuss. In preparation for the exposition of 2015 Thursday, October 30, from 8:30, at the Department of chemistry of the University "Sapienza" of Rome, will be held on seminar (free) "The mystery of the shroud"where we discuss this and more and will be discussed between science and history on the sheet of Turin. The speakers will be Luigi Campanella (organizer of the meeting, Wisdom), Luigi Gadre (University of Pavia), Paul Lazar (Enea-Frascati), Philip Burgarella, (Università della Calabria), Andrea Nicolotti (University of Turin). An event definitely inspiring, given the prestige of the speakers, and which will be the last public appearance in the guise of Rector Prof.Luigi Frati, who will get jobs, with the Vice Rector for research, Giancarlo Ruocco.
Now we know what cannot be the shroud (the testimony of a man who lived in the time of Jesus Christ), but understanding how the negative image you both politically and possibly reproduce the procedure could be very historical and scientific interest, and in this sense the title of the meeting represents well the problem: the Shroud is a fascinating conundrum.
Hat tip to Joe Marino for spotting the article last night.
Yesterday, Dan wrote to me about an earlier Charles Freeman’s article. In something perhaps of a senior moment, I confused it with another criticism of the latest article,The Origins of the Shroud of Turin. The mistake was completely mine.