Home | Latest News | Lectures and Seminars | Shroud 101 | Student Center |
| Shroud University | Image Gallery | Shroud Store |
Streaming Videos - Shroud Expert Interviews

The press loves controversy and everyone loves a mystery. The Shroud of Turin, believed by many to be the burial cloth wrapped about the crucified body of Jesus, offers both in high doses. Perhaps its time to re-evaluate the nature of the controversy that surrounds this mysterious artifact.

Oddly enough, the controversy around the Shroud keeps many Christians from looking at it for what it is…a visual representation of Jesus Christ. In fact, it may be more controversial within the church than it is outside of it. Protestants think it's too Catholic while the age-old Catholic interest in relics has waned in recent years perhaps because of past abuses and unsubstantiated claims.

Why is this so? Blame it on the Reformation. In October of 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses against indulgences on the door of the castle church of Wittenberg, the Catholic preoccupation with relics was in high swing. Following the sack of Constantinople in 1204 during the Fourth Crusade, hundreds of genuine relics that had been collected over Christianity's first thousand years were stolen and brought back as booty to find new homes in cathedrals throughout Western Europe.

Relics include far more than just items related to Jesus, such as the cross, the crown of thorns, the whip, or even His sandals. Relics encompass all items associated with the Apostles, the early church martyrs and great believers who eventually were designated saints. And why not? Collecting things of value is a human pastime. Thousands of museums around the world are filled with things we as humans have collected to remember the past and to honor key historic figures. Why should it be any different with the Church?

Before 1204, Constantinople, the center of the Eastern Church, had vaults filled with such artifacts. It was considered a great source of wealth in the same way a rare art collection would be looked at today. Most were considered authentic with a fully documented chain of ownership.

Maybe it was jealousy or rivalry, but the great cathedrals of the west had none of these holy treasures, and they wanted them. Sadly, one of the darkest tragedies of Christianity became even darker with churches lined up to buy, steal or "invent" one of these holy relics for their own. They knew that laying claim to one would greatly enhance tourism, which was a good source of the revenue needed to maintain these gigantic monuments of faith. But it was faith turned foul.

A largely ignorant and illiterate populace quickly ascribed mystical and magical powers to these holy artifacts, which fueled the abuse and trickery of charlatans who capitalized on the superstition of the masses. Soon items ascribed to the saints were being sold in the marketplace to the gullible and the desperate.

It's no wonder that the reformers reacted to such abuse. And since few if any of the true relics could be distinguished from the bogus, there was a wholesale rejection of all of them. The idea of good luck associated with such items had replaced faith and the reformers rightfully rejected such heretical notions. They also reacted to the use and abuse of icons: painted or sculpted images of Jesus, Mary and the saints.

Consequently, Protestant churches today barely have anything more than a cross to represent their faith. Luther's reaction to abuse was correct and needed. Some would say that the Reformation was the best thing that ever happened to the Catholic Church because it did bring about necessary reforms. But the Protestants, led by John Calvin, may have gone too far in their bias against images. Within Protestantism, legitimate Christian art is a lost art. There is an irrational fear that images of any kind will end up being worshipped or that they will replace true faith.

Yet, Protestants flock to Europe by the millions to behold the beauty and majesty of the great cathedrals…filled with magnificent mosaics, stained glass, sculptures and frescoes. Protestant churches today are starving for the beauty of Christian art.

Part of the Protestant fear of images stems from an incorrect interpretation of the Second Commandment to "Make no graven image (or carved images) of things on earth (or what we think is in heaven) because God is a jealous God". But when Moses came down from the mountain and found that his brother Aaron had allowed the people to make a golden calf to worship, it should have been obvious that this commandment was referring to idolatry. At a time when no one had ever seen the face of God including Moses, to craft something out of earthly material and claim that it represented the invisible God was reprehensible to Him.

But all that changed with the coming of Jesus a thousand years after this commandment was given. Jesus was "the image of the invisible God". Suddenly God himself became an image; the image was that of a man. With thousands of eyewitnesses to the majesty of Christ, the beginning of Christian art can be found in the catacombs of Rome, painted on the walls by early saints who would become martyrs of the faith.

To visually represent that which we know is true is not idolatry. It is a visual expression of faith. The Stations of the Cross, which grace the walls of every Catholic Church, simply tell the story of what Jesus suffered for us. The stained glass windows tell the story of faith in pictures. Only a handful of Protestant churches are adorned with such beauty. For the most part, Protestants seem comfortable with pictures only as long as they are in a children's book. The Reformer's over-reaction to the abuse of relics and icons has left us aesthetically impoverished and unnecessarily fearful of images.

Now we come to the Shroud of Turin, that 14-foot long linen cloth bearing the front and back images of a bearded, crucified man, including blood from the wounds. Is it a relic or a painted icon? Is the Shroud the same cloth known as the Mandylion that was stolen from Constantinople in 1204 along with all the other relics? Or is it a "cunningly crafted" medieval fraud? Many experts believe that the preponderance of evidence supports authenticity. It can never be proven absolutely that the Shroud of Turin is in fact the Shroud that wrapped Jesus in the tomb. In that sense the Shroud can never replace faith.

It is doubtful that the Shroud can ever be proven absolutely one way or the other. Recent developments showing how the carbon dating tests of 1988 were flawed by using a sample that was rewoven after the 1532 fire now raises the liklihood once again for the Shroud's authenticity.

The research will continue. There is always the possibility it could be proven a fake. Thats what the carbon dating labs said until their work was checked out 17 years later. Will we ever know for sure? Proably not. The main purpose of The Shroud of Turin Education Project, Inc. is to use the Shroud as a teaching tool, authentic or not, to teach the central truths of biblical Christianity. How is this accomplished? Because as you explore the mystery, you encounter the message. Whether it is ultimately proven real or not, the message conveyed through the blood stained cloth is the same message as the Gospel. It represents the life, suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus.

There are many biblical analogies. Jesus once said that we are either for him or against him. The Shroud is definitely supports a biblical view of Christianity. Paul wrote in Philipians 1:18, " But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice." This also indicates that we shoud not get too hung up proving absolutely that the Shroud is authentic before we risk having our church or school learn about it. Paul wouldn't care as long as Jesus was lifted up. We should have the same attitude.

Don't let controversy keep you from investigating the Shroud. Its what makes it interesting! And don't be afraid to have others in your church or school learn about it. By exploring the mystery, you encounter the message. The mystery intriques; the image instructs.

If Christian leaders, Protestant and Catholic, can get beyond their bias and fears and focus on the message, the Shroud could be used in the way God may have intended, as a visual Gospel to a video and information age.