hat tip to Stephen Jones
hat tip to Stephen Jones
hat tip to Stephen Jones
Let’s hope CBS News doesn’t object to my reposting the entire story, Pope pays for homeless to see Shroud of Turin by Anna Matranga. There has never been a shroud exposition like this one.
ROME — A bus was carrying 42 homeless people Wednesday from Rome to see the Shroud of Turin, regarded by many to be the sacred burial cloth of Jesus Christ, and Pope Francis was picking up the tab.
The group included not just Catholics but also Orthodox Christians and Muslims. What they have in common is that they all frequent a soup kitchen run by the Santa Lucia parish, near the Vatican.
Don Pablo Castiglia, deputy parish priest, was traveling with the group, along with seven volunteers. He said after the parish had organized the trip, the pope’s almoner, Bishop Konrad Krajewski, announced that Francis wanted to contribute money to cover the expenses.
Krajewski used donations given to the pope for his personal charities to help fund the trip.
"There’s an atmosphere of great interest" among the travelers, said Castiglia, adding that the group was being prepared during the bus trip with a video explaining the shroud.
Krajewski was there Wednesday morning when the homeless boarded the bus to Turin. According to Castiglia, Krajewski gave each person a small sum of pocket money, calling it a "caress" from Pope Francis.
The group was to spend Wednesday night in Catholic shelters in Turin, and then visit the shroud Thursday morning.
Next week a second group, about 70 poor and homeless, was to make the same journey. Krajewski told an Italian newspaper that the two groups "will prepare the way for the pope’s visit. His poor will arrive before him."
Pope Francis is to venerate the shrine on June 21.
Francis’ concern for and outreach to the poor has been a hallmark of his papacy.
He has had showers and barber facilities builtunder the colonnade of St. Peter’s Basilica for the exclusive use of the homeless.
For several years in a row he has chosen to celebrate his own birthday with Italy’s impoverished. Homeless people have had dinner in the Vatican museum and sat at the best seats in the house at a Vatican concert.
One homeless man has even been buried in a cemetery inside the Vatican under Francis’ tenure, which for centuries had been a final resting place only for royalty and luminaries.
Official Tweet points to the longer, official version: Papal schedule for Turin visit §RV http://rv.va/I32ZUR
The Vatican has released a full schedule for the trip to Turin by Pope Francis on June 21-22.
The highlight of the papal trip will be a visit to the city’s cathedral to reverence the Shroud of Turin during its current public exposition.
The Pope will leave Rome early on Sunday morning, June 21. Arriving in Turin’s airport, where he will be greeted by local Church leaders and civic officials, he will travel into the city. At the cathedral, he will pray before the Shroud and also before the altar of Blessed Waldensian.
After concelebrating Mass at the Piazza Vittorio, the Pontiff will make a series of short visits: to a youth-detention center, with immigrants, with a Roma (gypsy) family, with religious, with the sick and disabled, and finally in the evening with young people.
After a night in the archbishop’s residence, Pope Francis will speak on Monday morning at the Evangelical Waldensian Church. Later he will visit his own relatives, celebrating Mass privately with family members who still live in the Piedmont region, from which his own parents migrated to Argentina. In the afternoon the Pope will meet with members of the committee that organized the exposition of the Shroud before taking his flight back to Rome.
Time of visit news grabbers competing with the pope’s visit to the shroud:
“This is a small sample of Charles Freeman’s research on the subject, which should be more widely known so that National Geographic would be embarrassed to take the shroud seriously.”
— Ophelia Benson
While Colin complains that the world is ignoring his two-stage imprinting model, Charles Freeman is getting special attention for his painting theory from Ophelia Benson over at Butterflies and Wheels in the well-read Free Thought blogs collection. Benson is particularly well known for her criticism of pseudoscience and religious fundamentalism. She writes:
Charles Freeman has an article in History Today about the Shroud of Turin. He tells me the subject is neglected by academics, and “the absurd ideas of the authenticists are given full and virtually unchallenged internet space.” He adds that National Geographic is especially bad on this, maintaining “the idea that there is something inherently mysterious about the Shroud when in fact an afternoon in a conservation lab – which would find the traces of gesso and paint – would probably sort things out.” He gave me carte blanche to use the article, so have a feast.
So have a feast. Or not.
The Urban Dictionary defines stoopid as having the quality of being really, really, really, stupid.
My current two-stage imprinting/developing model, which the world of Shroudology
is still largely ignoring …
Colin tells us on his blog:
Digression: Yup, it’s how real science operates – there is no obligation in model-building to incorporate other people’s assumptions or preconceptions that might not have been given as much prior thought beforehand: science ain’t democratic, and would not have made such speedy progress between the 17th and 20th century if that had been the case. Science is unashamedly elitist, which is why scientists rely on each other via ‘peer-review’ to judge the fitness for publication in respected journals. There is no trial by media where traditional science is concerned. Internet-reporting of science in real time via the internet is a different matter entirely, which is why this blogger is taking the trouble right now to spell out the difference between a painting and an imprint, and will be explaining shortly why the a priori indications are that the TS image IS an imprint, not merely an artist’s attempt to simulate an imprint, or even a hybrid of painting and imprint, reiterating yet again his amazement that STURP bothered to squander so much time, energy and resources on checking out the depressingly third-rate “just a painting “ hypothesis when there were far more pressing questions to address re the MECHANISM of imprinting. STURP was supposed to be an elite task force, and should have behaved as such, eliminating non-starters from its model-building assumptions, and indeed should have STARTED WITH A MODEL, instead of thinking one could go in with space-age equipment and simply hoover up the relevant facts, arriving on time at a destination called Truth. Sorry, all you STURP defenders, but that’s not how science (real science, that is) works in the real world. Indeed, it sometimes fails to reach its destination on time, even using its preferred model building approach. To paraphrase Winston Churchill: experimentally-based model building is the worst form of enquiry, apart from all the others that have been tried from time to time.
So, to the question: why are/were we supposed to see the TS image as an imprint, a real imprint, not just an artist’s impression of an imprint, the answer, correction , answers, are painfully simple:
1. It’s the close correspondence to events leading up to and immediately following Joseph of Arimathea’s arrival at the cross bearing expensive linen for wrapping and transporting a sweat and blood-stained body, likely to leave an imprint, stoopid
2. It’s the up-and-over double image, on high quality linen, stoopid.
3. It’s the life-sized image, stoopid.
4. It’s the negative image with 3D properties, stoopid.
5. It’s the cardboard cut-out look, stoopid, with no imaging of sides, stoopid.
6. It’s the image superficiality, stoopid
7. It’s the real-looking bloodstains, stoopid.
8. It’s the absence of a loin cloth, stoopid.
9. It’s the absence of a crown of thorns, just strategically-sited blood stains in the hair etc, stoopid.
10. It’s those spindly fingers, exactly as expected from real imprinting, stoopid
11. Ten killer clues should be more than enough to be getting on with. If you want more than 10, then it’s the whole darn shebang, stoopid.
To conclude: to those of us who ain’t stoopid, the Turin Shroud IS a real imprint.
The real question is whether the TS could only have been formed by imprinting of the real Jesus onto his burial shroud, as we are repeatedly asked to consider and/or believe by certain self-styled "scientists", OR whether it could have been faked by a medieval artisan.
This retired scientist’s own position, after some 3.5 years of research, albeit in kitchen and garage: of course it could have been faked. My current two-stage imprinting/developing model, which the world of Shroudology is still largely ignoring (Thibault Heimburger MD being a notable exception) – or maybe has yet to learn of – shows how it could have been accomplished, at least in principle. It ain’t rocket science. Indeed, it’s part kitchen science, starting with plain white flour. Medieval alchemists could have supplied the nitric acid.
Hopefully my model will not turn out to be a damp squib, the way the STURP Summary was a damp squib, with much pseudo-science following in its wake, much of the latter coming from senior STURP members who, in view of their unique STURP credentials should have exercised greater self-restraint, no matter what their particular ‘world view’.