The Templars and the Shroud of Christ by Barbara Frale Page A

particular, see Icons as something else and more than images. Icons in a sense live and can give life; they can bestow real benefits on the spirit of the faithful. None of the many who have written about the Shroud noticed this fact, and yet it is not without importance. Calling it “a venerable icon” was a choice born of long, careful study by experts who certainly did not suffer from a shortage of vocabulary. That expression calls up directly the thought of the theologians of the Second Ecumenic Council ofNicaea (787 AD), to whom the prodigious image of Christ is the place where we achieve contact with the Divine; it expresses the will to look at that object in the same manner full of astonishment and wonder in which the ancient Church looked at it. It all turns on a very simple concept: to seriously study the Shroud means in any case to be meditating on the wounds ofJesus Christ. CardinalBallestrero’s was a most delicate definition, respectful of the depths of mystery that this object involves, but possibly a bit too erudite to be universally understood. For their part, several Popes have stated their views unhesitatingly: already Pius XI had spoken of it as an image “surely not of human making”, and John Paul II clearly described it as “the most splendid relic of both Passion and Resurrection” ( L’Osservatore Romano , 7 September 1936 and 21-22 April 1980).
    I myself suspect that there may be something else at issue. If and when the Church ever officially declares the Shroud to be the one true winding-sheet ofJesus, it could become very difficult, maybe even impossible, to continue to make scientific studies of it. It would then be absolutely the holiest relic owned by Christendom, thick with Christ’s own blood, and any manipulation would be seen as disrespectful. While Christendom still wants to examine this enigmatic object, it still has plenty of questions to ask: there is a widespread feeling that it may have plenty to tell about Roman-age Judaism, that is the very context of the life, preaching and death ofJesus of Nazareth. This, apart from any religious evaluation, is a most interesting field of study. We know very little of that period of Jewish history, because of the devastations carried out by the Roman EmperorsVespasian (70 AD) andHadrian (132 AD), which involved the destruction of Jerusalem and all its archives and the deportation of the Jewish population away from Syria-Palestine. Some important clues to be found on the Turin sheet promise to have a lot to say about Judaic usages in the age of the Second Temple. One of ancient Hebraism’s greatest historians, PaoloSacchi, writes: “Whether we believe or not in the divinity ofJesus of Nazareth, he spoke the language of his time to the men of his time, dealing directly with issues of his time” ( Storia del Secondo Tempio , p. 17). If we question it delicately and respectfully, the Shroud will answer.
    This book will not tackle any of the complex issues to do with the cloth’s authenticity and religious sig-nificance. Anyone wishing to enlarge their understanding of these areas will find sufficient answers in the books of MonsignorGiuseppe Ghiberti, Sindone, vangeli e vita cristiana and Dalle cose che patì (Eb 5,8). Evangelizzare con la sindone . This essay is only intended as a discussion along historical lines; and there can be no doubt that, to historians, the Shroud of Turin (whatever it may be) is a piece of material evidence of immense interest.
    This book is the first part of a study that is completed by a second volume, The Shroud of Jesus of Nazareth , dedicated entirely to the new historical questions that arise from recent discoveries made on the cloth. Some of the main arguments treated there are only hinted at here, and that was inevitable: for the argument enters into issues concerning Jewish and Greco-Roman archaeology from the first century AD, themes far too distant from the story of the Templars to place them all in a