Also, on shroud.com, read A PROFILE IN COURAGE by The Reverend Albert R. Dreisbach, Jr.
(A Speech delivered in Atlanta, Georgia during Black History Week)
Kim was mentioned yesterday. It’s time, I think, to dust off and repeat the dedication page of this blog:
The Reverend Albert R. ‘Kim’ Dreisbach, Jr.
April 27, 1934 – April 29, 2006
Kim died on a Saturday. The next day, at the Episcopal Church I attend[ed] in New York, 750 miles away from Kim’s home in Atlanta, the Eucharist was dedicated to Father Kim Dreisbach.
The Gospel …[that day] was Luke’s telling of the disciples encountering Jesus on the Road to Emmaus (24:13-35). It was fitting. I remember how Kim and I had discussed this passage on numerous occasions. He was certain that an understanding of this passage and the story of Thomas in the Upper Room were important to understanding the Shroud. I didn’t always agree with his interpretations but I cherished the opportunity to think these things through and argue with him.
"Read this story carefully," Kim said. "Jesus is telling the disciples on the Road to Emmaus to not merely believe what they perceive. The disciples had the facts right," he stressed, "but their eyes needed to be opened to the ‘truth’ revealed in the facts."
Kim, as a priest, scholar and friend, worked to do that for many of us: to open our eyes to truth. He did so with humor, scholarship, imagination, and the love of Christ.
I learned that you could telephone Kim anytime. Well — anytime, unless a Yankee game was on television, radio or the internet. Well — also, as I once learned, it was not advisable to call him if the Yankees had just lost a close game. But other than those times, Kim was always available and ready for discussion. And, invariably, he would follow up by sending long emails marked up with yellow highlighting, with copious quotations from numerous scholars, and with his own comments boldly typed in red.
Yesterday, by the time Kim got to the Atlanta airport, the Yankees had just clobbered the Blue Jays, 17-6. He certainly knew that and was probably telling every flight attendant, ticket agent and skycap all about the game. Kim was like that. He loved talking to everyday strangers about good news.
I remember sitting in a restaurant with him in Atlanta. Barrie and Russ probably remember, as well. There were about a dozen of us Shroudies at one long table. It wasn’t long before Kim was talking to perfect strangers at nearby tables, telling them about the Shroud. They were fascinated by him and what he had to say, just as we have been.
Kim loved jokes. And Kim definitely had strong opinions. I imagine a scene at the gates of heaven where three Shroudies have just arrived, Kim being one of them. They are in a waiting room, awaiting an admissions interview with St. Peter. The first one is ushered in. He remains for about an hour and then returns. The others turn to him and ask him what happened.
"St. Peter asked me to explain the Shroud of Turin to him," he said. "I tried. Then St. Peter explained it to me. I can’t believe how wrong I was."
The second Shroudie is invited in. She, too, is gone for about an hour. When she returns she tells the same story about how wrong she had been about the Shroud.
Then Kim is ushered in. An hour passes, then two, then three, four. Finally, after five hours, St. Peter comes out to the waiting room and sits down. "I just met with Kim," he says. "I can’t believe how wrong I was."
+ From the Book of Common Prayer that Kim so loved: "O God, the King of saints, we praise and magnify thy holy Name for thy servant "Kim" who has finished his course in thy faith and fear; for the blessed Virgin Mary; for the holy patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs; and for all other thy righteous servants, known to us and unknown; and we beseech thee that, encouraged by their fellowship, we also may be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light; through the merits of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."
Barrie Schwortz writes on STERA’s Facebook page:
With the 18th anniversary of http://www.shroud.com coming up on January 21, 2014, I thought you might like to read the paper I presented in Turin in June 1998 (when the website was only 2 years old) that shared my vision of how the internet could play an important role in future Shroud research. I just read it again for the first time in 16 years and it is somewhat dated, but you might find it interesting. Here it is, in case you missed it:http://www.shroud.com/schwortz.htm
I am sure that I speak for most of us when I say thank you, Barrie. And congratulations for having your outstanding vision, your dedication to excellence and your perseverance in the face of a lot of difficult work. You made it happen.
Today, if we type “Shroud of Turin” into a Google search box, we discover that there are about . . .
- 869,000 webpages (HTML and PDF, many among dedicated websites)
- 247,000 videos (admittedly many duplicates)
- 144,000 blog postings
- countless images (and countless copies)
Barrie, your website is a treasure trove. And, but and so too is everything about the shroud found elsewhere on the internet. You didn’t create all of that material, Barrie. But in one way or another you inspired it – you inspired us. I regret to inform you, however, are not allowed to tire or retire. You have been too successful to allow that to happen.
Joe Marino writes:
I rediscovered an old radio interview with Adler that I forgot I had. It was on a program called Dreamland and was broadcast in May 1999, as the interviewer mentioned the upcoming conference that was to be held the next month in Richmond, Virginia. There’s nothing really new in it, but what I found surprising is that it sounds like Adler blamed the C-14 labs instead of the Turin authorities for the choice of the C-14 sample. But of course the more important aspect is what Adler thought of the sample itself. The interviewer asked Adler what he thought was at the heart of the problem from his point of view regarding the C-14 test. He said:
I was on the original protocol committee and we demanded that the test be only precise but it be accurate. Precise is how repeatable a measurement is. The radiocarbon people did a good job with precision. But they did not do a good job with accuracy. Accuracy is how true it is. And where they screwed up was taking the original sample. If you’re only going to take one sample, which is all they did, you have to be sure that the sample you take is typical of the rest of the cloth. Since this is a sample that came from a waterstained, scorched area that showed repairs on one edge, you already have a right to challenge whether it was going to be accurate. On top of that, you have the infrared work, which shows it doesn’t have the same composition, so clearly there’s no proof that it’s accurate.
The photograph is from Alan D. Adler and The Shroud of Turin, a webpage written by his daughter, Chris.
Back in mid-September, David Rolfe wrote to let us know that Hugh Farey [Was taking] Over as BSTS Newsletter Editor. Now we know what he looks like. And we have more information through a new entry at shroud.com:
We recently reported that the BSTS Newsletter was in danger of extinction unless a new editor could be found, so you can imagine how very pleased we are to announce that a new editor has indeed been found in the form of BSTS Member Huge Farey. In a recent message to the online Shroud Science Group, Hugh introduced himself. With his permission, here is what he said:
"…I have been Head of Science in a Catholic school in England for nearly 40 years, and frequently find myself at the cutting edge of the Science vs. Religion debate. I have been interested in the Shroud for most of my life, and began seriously researching and experimenting about a year ago, inspired by David Rolfe’s organising of a BSTS meeting featuring the Art Historian Thomas de Wesselow.
"I do not have a website of my own, but contribute frequently to shroudstory.com, and Shroud related threads on other sites. If I had to define my particular sphere of involvement, I wouldn’t select an academic field such as History, Chemistry or Art, but rather the methodology underlying all of them; an insistence on primary sources, a tolerance of opposing opinions, and a clear explanation of whatever conclusions are drawn. I hope this will assist me in editing the BSTS newsletter…"
We want to welcome Hugh and extend our best wishes to him in his new task as editor. We look forward to working with him to keep the BSTS Newsletter alive and well (and available online) far into the future! Watch for the next issue of the BSTS Newsletter in our January 21, 2014 Eighteenth Anniversary update.