Update on the St. Louis Conference, October 9-12, 2014

Joe Marino in an email writes:

Barrie has posted a new update at www.shroud.com.

It includes information about the St. Louis Shroud conference to be held in October 2014.

The conference site general information page can be found at:  http://shroud.wikispaces.com/St.+Louis+Conference+2014.  The registration page is not yet ready but we hope to have it online in early 2014.

imageWe have some significant news regarding participants.

Prof. Bruno Barberis [pictured] of the Turin Centro has accepted the committee’s invitation to attend.  He even hopes to present one or two papers per correspondence with me.

In addition, we have preliminary commitments from 6 STURP members to attend.

I’m looking forward to a very exciting conference and seeing many old and new faces!  We hope to see as many SSG members that can make it.

Let me also take this opportunity to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Some of you may be wondering who is Prof. Bruno Barberis?

1) Over at shroud.com find Who’s Who in the Shroud World: An Interview with Bruno Barberis

2) This URL, https://shroudstory.com/?s=Barberis, constructs a special page of all postings in this blog that contain Prof. Barberis’ name. The most significant of those posts is Barberis: Fanti’s conclusions are not scientific

3) Here is an interview of Bruno Barberis by Jerome Corsi:

6 thoughts on “Update on the St. Louis Conference, October 9-12, 2014”

    1. Vinny, I assume you are asking because you are thinking of submitting a paper to the folks in St. Louis. It might be a nice idea to explain what VVVP is about. The 35 second video is a bit short of details. An abstract might do. A CV from you might be appreciated by anyone thinking of partnering with you. Go ahead, you can post that here, as long as you keep it to a couple of pages.

  1. No wont have time to submit a paper and unless it is submitted by qualified scientists why bother have been there done that have noticed you have qualified scientists on your site who are your friends. I also appologise for what I said before about the ”old crowd” . Will post asap a deatailed abstract no more than 2 pages. Dan, the Vatican Veronica discovery is our only hope

  2. As a respected Shroud scholar Professor Bruno Barberis has every right to express his opinion, but that is only half of the story. The other half can be seen in the introduction and last paragraph in the interview-article “Science and religion meet in Shroud research” posted on the Holy Shroud Guild website.
    Why crucify Professor Giulio Fanti? Ian Wilson reached a somewhat similar conclusion at the end of his 1978 Shroud book and does not appear to have changed his position. All of us are racked by doubts about almost everything under the sun and IW clearly stated the reason why he is a Christian (RC) in the postscript of his book “Jesus: the evidence”. It has nothing to do with the Turin Shroud and corresponds to what all believing Christians, and their respective churches, think. In a nutshell: first Jesus, then the Turin Shroud, not the other way round.

    1. Louis, I think it’s a counsel of perfection, but it’s not how 21st century minds work any more. First the evidence, then comes faith. In the beginning, Christianity had its roots in the Torah. But the eventual discovery that the Torah had much of mythic content, changes nothing. We are discovering that many of our preconceptions of the Shroud might not be sustained, but it changes nothing.

  3. David I agree with you when it comes to evidence and how the 21st century mind works. In the 20th century Husserl had his own interpretation of evidence:
    As you know, in the realm of Shroud studies we have scientists and scholars saying that the image demonstrates the Resurrection, others (not scientists) saying that it shows he was alive when the image was formed and yet others using the image to say that not only was he alive but went to India and lies buried in Kashmir!
    It seems that Christianity had its beginning in the risen Christ, who appeared to James (who believed in the Torah) and Paul (for whom the Torah was secondary).
    It is not at all difficult to agree with your last line.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: