From a local story on WIVT/WBGH, Binghamton, New York Channel 34:
Saint Michael’s Orthodox Church in Binghamton is celebrating the Easter season with an exhibit dedicated to the Shroud of Turin.
The display in the sanctuary includes a life sized reproduction of a photograph taken in 1931 of what many believe to be the burial cloth of Jesus. Father Thomas Drobena, a Lutheran priest from Connecticut, purchased the print after seeing the Shroud in Turin, Italy. Every evening this week, he will conduct a presentation at Saint Mike’s explaining both the markings in the photo and what’s there but can’t be seen.
Fr. Thomas Drobena says, "For example, the hands of Jesus are folded in front of him. And scientists have discovered that there is blood underneath the hands, something that you cannot see."
The church is open for viewing each day from noon until 1 pm through Friday. Then, at 7 pm each day, Father Drobena will conduct his Mysteries of the Shroud presentation. He says that will include an explanation of how the image is not actually on the cloth.
Did he say blood underneath the hands? Or was he misquoted?
The news piece also says he will show how the image is not really on the cloth. I am hoping he is only referring to the superficiality of the image.
I have what may be an ignorant question, but a question none the less. It is accepted that the image did not form where here was blood stains.
The image on the Shroud is most pronounced on one side of the Shroud. My assumption is that the image appears on the side of he Shroud that was touching or adjacent to the body. I do not think here is really any question of that. That means that exterior of the Shroud in the tomb would be that part which was exterior as it wrapped (was lain across?) the body.
There are some very faint markings of a few parts of the image on the exterior which for most of the Shroud’s recorded history was hidden behind the Holland lining.
But what about evidence of blood stains? Has here been any identification of blood seepage through the cloth, interior to exterior?
The studies done in ’78 found that the blood had seeped thru the fabric to the backside of the cloth. They found this when they unstitched parts of the Shroud from the backing cloth and ran light probes under the cloth. This was also confirmed during the 2002 restoration when the backing cloth was completely removed. As for the image; again in 2002 they also believe what they found was a ‘partial’ face image on the back side of the ventral image, coinciding, with the ventral face image. Apparently no other part of the cloth; ventral or dorsal showed any image except as mentioned above.
As for image under the blood, I believe this was confirmed by a couple of researchers in that when a blood flake was lifted or broke away from the threads the linen was completely white underneath. It escapes me right now who these researchers were, sorry.
R