Icons and the Shroud of Turin

[kisstheson]

I noticed the icon on the topic board is one of the icons that "shroudies" say was copied from the Shroud of Turin. Another one is the edessa image. Do you think the Shroud is the true image of Christ? Whoops...the icon in the board is the edessa image.

[buzuxi02]

I believe the shroud (of Turin i gather) is a unique religious artifact but not the actual burial cloth of Christ. By the way what icon of edessa on the top board??? The only icon displayed on this board that i see is the Pantokrator of Sinai.

[MoNiCa4316]

I've read several Orthodox articles mentioning the Shroud and they all supported it :)

I think it's probably authentic...science seems to agree...

I don't know for sure though! ;)

[Philothei]

I agree with Buzuxi it is an artifact ... we do not know whether it is truly the one Christ used. But it does not make any difference ... at least to me. If people want to believe it as true... it is okay no harm done...


Yes this icon is of the Monastery of Sinai. I believe it is St. Catherine's right?

[buzuxi02]

Yes thats the 6th century icon found at St Catherines Monastery on Mt Sinai. One of the earliest depictions of a bearded Christ and the earliest known 'Christ the Pantocrator' (Almighty) Icon.

[ThePosterFormerlyKnownAs]

Clark Carlton has an interesting take on the shroud in his April 26, 2007 podcast. http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/carlton/P30/

[Michael the Iconographer]

I noticed the icon on the topic board is one of the icons that "shroudies" say was copied from the Shroud of Turin. Another one is the edessa image. Do you think the Shroud is the true image of Christ? Whoops...the icon in the board is the edessa image.
The Holy Mandylion of Edessa is the true face of Christ. I have prayed before it and know it to be authentic. As for the Shroud of Turin, I am not so sure about it. I have seen things that make it look like it is not authentic. Whatever its status is, the Holy Mandylion of Edessa is NOT a copy of the Shroud of Turin or influenced by it in any way.

[Kolya]

Our Parish Priest is one of the Russian Orthodox Church's highest qualified, if not THE highest qualified, academics in Catholic/Russian Orthodox relations. He is in the ROC Department of Extrenal Affairs, under the Director, Metropolitan Kirill, and frequently assists the Metropolitan when there are issues between our respective churches.

One day during our Orthodox Study class I asked him straight out if he considered the "Shroud of Turin" to be a genuine relic. His answer was a straightforward YES! I do believe that he knows what he is talking about, so I have no reason to doubt what he says.

BTW, when Pope John Paul II so graciously returned the icon of Our Lady of Kazan, he was one of those sent to test its authenticity. He confirmed that it is not the original icon, which is still missing. The Church however accepted the 'gift' with dignity and without unnecessary animosity.

[ThePosterFormerlyKnownAs]

Whatever its status is, the Holy Mandylion of Edessa is NOT a copy of the Shroud of Turin or influenced by it in any way.

I agree. If the Shroud of Turin is authentic, then it is still predated by the Holy Mandylion of Edessa because it would be the burial shroud of Christ whereas the Holy Mandylion was made by Christ prior to His crucifixion.

[Kolya]

I agree. If the Shroud of Turin is authentic, then it is still predated by the Holy Mandylion of Edessa because it would be the burial shroud of Christ whereas the Holy Mandylion was made by Christ prior to His crucifixion.

Can't argue with that.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Our Parish Priest is one of the Russian Orthodox Church's highest qualified, if not THE highest qualified, academics in Catholic/Russian Orthodox relations. He is in the ROC Department of Extrenal Affairs, under the Director, Metropolitan Kirill, and frequently assists the Metropolitan when there are issues between our respective churches.

One day during our Orthodox Study class I asked him straight out if he considered the "Shroud of Turin" to be a genuine relic. His answer was a straightforward YES! I do believe that he knows what he is talking about, so I have no reason to doubt what he says.

BTW, when Pope John Paul II so graciously returned the icon of Our Lady of Kazan, he was one of those sent to test its authenticity. He confirmed that it is not the original icon, which is still missing. The Church however accepted the 'gift' with dignity and without unnecessary animosity.
The Catholic Church still has the Holy Mandylion of Edessa and really does need to return it to the Orthodox Church. The Mandylion is in the hands of the Vatican.

[Kolya]

The Catholic Church still has the Holy Mandylion of Edessa and really does need to return it to the Orthodox Church.

Couldn't agree more. It must come home, along with the head of John the Forerunner and many more!

[Michael the Iconographer]

Couldn't agree more. It must come home, along with the head of John the Forerunner and many more!
Praying before the Holy Mandylion is a very powerful experience!

[Kolya]

Praying before the Holy Mandylion is a very powerful experience!

I could not think of many things more wonderful than that!

[SpyridonOCA]

I noticed the icon on the topic board is one of the icons that "shroudies" say was copied from the Shroud of Turin. Another one is the edessa image. Do you think the Shroud is the true image of Christ? Whoops...the icon in the board is the edessa image.

The image of Edessa is, I believe, what we now call the Shroud of Turin.

[Incognitus]

This books proves the shroud is authentic:

"The Shroud and the Controversy: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for Authenticity", Gary Habermas and Kenneth Stevenson (Thomas Nelson, 1990)

[Michael the Iconographer]

The image of Edessa is, I believe, what we now call the Shroud of Turin.
No, the shroud of turin is not the Holy Mandylion of Edessa. I have prayed before the actual Holy Mandylion of Edessa and it is a very different thing from the shroud.

[Michael the Iconographer]

This books proves the shroud is authentic:

"The Shroud and the Controversy: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for Authenticity", Gary Habermas and Kenneth Stevenson (Thomas Nelson, 1990)
Proove is a very strong word.

[SpyridonOCA]

No, the shroud of turin is not the Holy Mandylion of Edessa. I have prayed before the actual Holy Mandylion of Edessa and it is a very different thing from the shroud.

In 1978, Ian Wilson published a surprising break-through in the history of the Turin Shroud: that the Edessa icon was in fact unfolded to reveal the Shroud still in Turin today. It was the latter that "disappeared," according to Robert of Clari, after the fall of Constantinople in 1204, the same that reappeared in Lirey about 1355 in possession of Geoffroy de Charny.
http://www.shroud.com/scavone2.htm



Where did you see the real image of Edessa?

[Michael the Iconographer]

Where did you see the real image of Edessa?
I prayed before the real Holy Mandylion of Edessa when it was in Cincinnatti in 2004 with an exhibit entitled "St. Peter and the Vatican."

[SpyridonOCA]

I prayed before the real Holy Mandylion of Edessa when it was in Cincinnatti in 2004 with an exhibit entitled "St. Peter and the Vatican."

It is one of these that you saw?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_of_Edessa#Surviving_images

[Michael the Iconographer]

It is one of these that you saw?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_of_Edessa#Surviving_images
No, similar but not that one.

[prodromos]

No, similar but not that one.
I believe Aria posted a picture of the genuine article a couple of years ago.

I think this might be the same, I'm not sure though.
http://www.spiritrestoration.org/images/mandylion%20of%20edessa.jpg

I recall it having an extremely gaudy frame :D
It might be this one, I haven't found a full picture yet.
http://www.expo2000.de/expo2000/tn/images/tn/base/100141521.jpg

found one, I think this is the original, or they all are, and it is just different angles and lighting that is messing with my brain :)
http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/mandyllon_041126.jpg

John

[Michael the Iconographer]

The top one is it, I believe. It does have a very, very elaborate monstrance arround it, which only takes away from the actual Mandylion itself.

[prodromos]

The top one is it, I believe. It does have a very, very elaborate monstrance arround it, which only takes away from the actual Mandylion itself.
Agreed!

[Matrona]

I personally don't believe any miraculous image of Christ survived the Middle Ages and that anything purporting to be one today is either a copy or a fake. It's sad, but it only underscores the evil wrought by the Crusades, that such precious relics were lost forever.