According to the Catholic Herald in the U.K., Archbishop Nichols “suggested that it didn’t necessarily matter if a relic was authentic or not.”
As for the Shroud of Turin, the article states:
Pope Benedict XVI, visiting the Turin Shroud last year, did not address whether or not it was authentic, but spoke of its “intensity”: it was, he said, a symbol of the darkest, loneliest moments of Christ’s suffering, yet was also the brightest sign of hope.
There is plenty of debate in the comments and not much support for Nichols’s position. It makes for interesting reading at Debate: Does it matter if relics are fake? | CatholicHerald.co.uk
As a Catholic AND rational guy of the 21st century, yes, it really matters to me to know if the Shroud is genuine or not… If it’s not, then it just a good depiction of Christ suffering but that’s all. If it is genuine, then the meaning of the Shroud is much more important !
I’m not talking about a proof of the resurrection here. To this day, I don’t believe someone can seriously claim that there’s any scientific proof of the resurrection on the Shroud (signs of it, maybe yes, but no proof). No, here, I’m talking about the great love of God for the world !!! A love so great that he gave his life for us !!! That’s the principal meaning of the Shroud to me if he is genuine (and I believe he is).
They blocked me from leaving comments. Perhaps my pederast priest remarks were unwelcome.