SO WELL PUT AND SO TRUE: From an email yesterday:
Journalists are not normally experts on the subjects on which they report. They must always look for a countervailing view. The problem with the Shroud is – and I speak from experience – it is impossible to find anyone who has actually made a detailed impartial study of the Shroud who remains, on balance, skeptical about its authenticity. Consequently, only highly partial critics are available to journalists and thus the Shroud and the public remain badly served. Of course, among Shroud enthusiasts there is plenty to discuss and differ over, but basic authenticity is not a dividing issue. – David Rolfe
By-the-way, if you haven’t seen David’s revised website, click on the above image or visit http://www.shroud-enigma.com/. Oh, and also, the old www.shroud.tv URL now redirects to the new URL, which is a big deal since it protects old links.
I think this comment is true but, at the same time, I have some difficulty to really understand well the last part. How can “basic authenticity” could be a dividing issue among those who believe the Shroud is authentic ???
Maybe I didn’t understand well what M. Rolfe meant… I just don’t get it.
Read it again Yannick, … slowly ;-) He’s basically saying that although enthusiasts of the Shroud, (like you and I), can differ over ‘details’ of the Shroud, we (deep down) agree and do not question the Shroud’s authenticity.
Ron
Ok, I get it. It’s true. Thanks for the translation. That proves I’m not 100% bilingual yet ! But I’m sure I’m better than the majority of the quebecers ! ;-)
Anyway, I think to be really enthusiast about the Shroud, you have to firsly believe it is authentic… That’s the bottom line.