Another Article on Francesca Saracino’s “La notte della Sindone” Documentary

imageMarco Tosatti writes, today, in Vatican Insider:

“It’s the greatest scientific cheat of all times”. So Franco Faia, the man who with Luigi Gonella and Giovanni Riggi di Numana was one of the workers, and witness of the operation of the dating of the Holy Shroud, describes what happened then. Faia gives his opinion in “La notte della Sindone”, a documentary movie by Francesca Saracino, produced by Paolo Monaci Freguglia for Polifemo, a co-production with Rai, distributed in Italy by Medusa Home Entertainment.

The movie offers a very accurate reconstruction, with documents and witnesses both new, of a real patchwork of secrets, manoeuvres and mysteries: the controversial exam with the C14, a thriller not yet clear at this moment, with many questions unanswered.

Vatican Insider has had in preview the entire DVD, and specially the “special contents”, never revealed up to now, of the puzzle. It seems particularly interesting a fresh document, which sheds a clear light on the C14 question, and on the statement according to which the Holy Shroud would be a medieval object.

Source: Shroud, a documentary raises the opposition to the tests C14

10 thoughts on “Another Article on Francesca Saracino’s “La notte della Sindone” Documentary”

  1. Taking what I can from the article above, I don’t believe there is much ‘NEW’ to be found in the documentary that has not already been covered in several books, papers, ecetera. But ‘IF’ this documentary covers most all that has been found and mentioned before, then it should be quite interesting to view, especially for those who have not taken the time to investigate all the ‘funny stuff’ related to the 1988 radiocarbon dating. I look forward to viewing this documentary in anticipation of possibly any new evidence.


  2. I had understood that it was supposed to be available in the U.S. around now (it’s already dubbed into English for the Italian parts. Many of the people interviewed spoke in English. I will try and find out more.

  3. “Greatest scientific cheat of all times”? That’s funny. Both Gonella and Riggi were there to decide and have heated arguments about the site from where the samples had to be cut. Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, OCD did not take that much interest, at least in the beginning, apparently because of his “Carmelite spirituality,” but years later he gave an interview to an Italian magazine saying that he had been manipulated and expressing sadness about what had been done. Father Werner Bulst told German TV that there was a “plot”, and I had first-hand confirmation about what he was referring to. So it will be important to see what fresh information Franco Faia brings.

    1. Your not implying that ‘some’ church officials had any dubious dealings with the C14 issues are you? ;-)

      I think it would have been more appropriate to state “Greatest Conspiracy of All Times” then specifically Greatest ‘scientific’ cheat of all times….Can I say conspiracy? LOL. The whole thing was a sham, from the Church’s dealings to the scientific testing to compromised results. It is really truly a wonder, that a documentary of this type has not come to light much much earlier…or maybe one has, but has not been given much press.


  4. Louis : Father Werner Bulst told German TV that there was a “plot”, and I had first-hand confirmation about what he was referring to. So it will be important to see what fresh information Franco Faia brings.

    Louis, it would be great if you could share in this blog that info on the plot you mention

  5. Gabriel, if you go through the history of the Shroud since 1988 you will find material on the “plot” with a lot of variations in the story. It is the result of people within the Church doubting the authenticity of the relic even before the carbon dating. Curiously, Professor Carlos Chagas, who did not believe in authenticity either, prepared the best protocol, which was thrown by into the dustbin. It seems the co-producer of the documentary is RAI and for that reason something good can be expected. Whatever is said, it better be something really new and convincing because the “plot” does not seem to have affected the decision about the sample and the results.

  6. You’re welcome, Gabriel. The focus should be on what has been called “many questions unanswered.” It could something about what exactly Cardinal Ballestrero was referring to in his interview without going into details and there appears to have been treachery there, treachery coming from those who “manipulated” him. If my guess is correct the document will tell us who the traitors were and, on my part, I wish to see why they acted that way and if it is in agreement with what I was told. Best.

Comments are closed.