Thursday, January 10, 2008

TSoT: Bibliography "R"

This is the Bibliography "R" page for authors' surnames beginning with "R" of books

[Right: Cover of, "The Holy Shroud" (1981), by the late Msgr. Giulio Ricci, founding president of the Rome Center for Sindonology. See PS and `tagline' quotes below (bold emphases mine, italics emphases original) which are all from this book.]

that I will probably refer to in my book outline, "The Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus?"

© Stephen E. Jones



Ricci, G., 1978, "The Way of the Cross in the Light of the Holy Shroud," [1975], Center for the Study of the Passion of Christ and the Holy Shroud: Milwaukee WI, Second edition, Reprinted, 1982.
Ricci, G., 1981, "The Holy Shroud," Center for the Study of the Passion of Christ and the Holy Shroud: Milwaukee WI.
Ricci, G., 1982, "Guide to the Photographic Exhibit of the Holy Shroud," Center for the Study of the Passion of Christ and the Holy Shroud: Milwaukee WI.
Rinaldi, P.M., 1978, "The Man in the Shroud," [1972], Futura: London, Revised.
Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN.

PS: See Ricci's evidence below, which I cannot recall having heard of, that the length of the Shroud of Turin today, "4.36 ... metres ... or 14 feet 3.8 inches", less a piece at the foot of the Shroud of "about 40 cm. (15.76 inches) cut off by the Emperor Baldwin II in 1247" equals the "eight feet," in "the old Norman foot of 29.7 cm. (or 11.69 inches)", that an Irish pilgrim named Arculfus in AD670 measured "the sacred napkin which was placed upon the head [and the body]' of the Lord in the Sepulchre," which "corresponded to 2.376 metres (7 feet 9.6 inches), a measurement which can be doubled to 4.752 metres (15 feet 7.2 inches)." That is, the Shroud today is 4.36m, which when adding 0.40m cut off in AD1247, equals 4.76 metres, which in turn agrees with "4.752 metres", being Arculfus' AD670 measurement, in the then old Norman foot, of what seems to be the Shroud, folded in two.

Also, "by adding the frontal and dorsal imprints" of the image on the Shroud" "204+208"cm , then "dividing by two, and subtracting 25 cm ... for the soles of the feet" is 181cm. This agrees with the "180 cm." "which was the height of the life-size [i.e. "the height of Jesus"] cross," the now lost "crux mensuralis ... of Justinian (527-565)."

These are two additional lines of evidence that the Shroud of Turin is in fact the very burial sheet of Christ!

Shroud: Stephen E. Jones, BSc. (Biology).
My other blogs: CreationEvolutionDesign & Jesus is Jehovah!

"Thus, once we have, for obvious reasons, excluded direct testimony to the presence of the Holy Shroud in the Middle East in the first centuries, our research is limited to indirect sources. They would be those found in the apocryphal books which, though they are not on the level of revealed faith, have unquestionable historical value as religious literature, often being written for teaching purposes. They are from the first three centuries and in them the Holy Shroud is spoken of as a sheet which covered the body of the Lord `like a gown', and was handed down by the Lord Himself to the servant of the priest [Apoc. Gospel of St Matthew] - an action which, according to Fr. Vaccari, is equivalent to an account of transmission. The `gown' had othonia, i.e. thin linen fibres [Acts of Philip]. There is a veiled reproach from Annas and Caiphas against Joseph of Arimathea for having used a new shroud (which was prohibited by Jewish custom) for this criminal. [Acts of Pilate]" (Ricci, 1981, p.xxv. Greek transliterated).

"During the first century the belief was growing that on the day of the final resurrection bodies would be dressed in their burial garments. Because of this, the abuse of covering dead bodies with expensive and splendid decorations was replacing the use of a plain shroud. ... The use of a plain shroud for burial was current among Jews before the Christian era. It is mentioned in the Book of Adam and Eve (Vita Adae et Evae), written by a Jew before the end of the first century B.C. The book relates that on the death of Eve the Archangel Michael instructed Seth to do what the angels had done for the bodies of Adam and Abel, i.e. wrap the body in a plain shroud. He then `commanded that from that time until the day of resurrection, all the dead should be prepared in this way'. At the end of the first and again of the second centuries, there were two returns to the original Jewish custom of the plain shroud as used at the time of the Lord. The first was under Rabbi Gamaliel II, the grandson of St. Paul's teacher, who stipulated that on his death he was to be buried in a plain shroud, and this example was followed by all the people. The same thing took place, for the same reasons, under Rabbi Judah I, the grandson of Gamaliel II, who succeeded in bringing back the early Jewish custom." (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxv-xxvi).

"The Christian or Judaeo-Christian apocryphal sources also frequently contain such references. They are more valuable since, in spite of their predominantly literary worth, they reveal a connection with the true Shroud which leads one to think of an intentional implied reference to the true relic which, in the seething Judaeo-Christian atmosphere of the times, would never have been approved of or tolerated if it had been discovered, since whoever owned it would have found himself seriously opposed by Mosaic law concerning legal purity and the cult of images. [Lv 11:25] The apocryphal sources of `The Death of Joseph the Carpenter' tell of the Lord Himself who, on the death of Joseph, washed the body and anointed it with spices, then ordered two angels to cover it with a `shroud of fine weaving'. When the chiefs of the city were ready to carry out the burial rites, according to Jewish custom, they found the body wrapped in a shroud which had no opening and was closed like a tunic with no seam. St. John also, according to one of the apocryphal accounts - that of `The Acts of the Apostles' - was buried in a simple manner, wrapped in a shroud. [Apoc. Acts of the Apostles] There is also the moving story of the death of St. Philip who, on the eve of his crucifixion, instructed one of his disciples: `Take my body and wrap it in papyrus, and not in linen material as the body of the Lord was wrapped in the shroud'". [Acta Philippi 143, Lipsius Bonnet, pt. II, vol. II, p. 83]" (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxvi-xxvii).

"`The Gospel of Nicodemus', originally written in Aramaic by a Jewish Christian almost immediately after the death of the Lord, is a most moving document. It tells of an apparition of the Lord to Joseph of Arimathea, when Jesus says: `I am Jesus, whose body you requested from Pilate and dressed in a clean shroud. On my head you placed a sudarium and laid me in the tomb ....' And Nicodemus says to Jesus: `Show me the place where you were buried'. Jesus, pointing to the place where they buried Him, `showed me the shroud in which I wrapped him and the sudarium which I placed on his head'." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxvii).

"The `shroud of fine weaving' used as a garment, and its material, linen, are features mentioned in these documents of the first three centuries, features which are not found in the Gospel narratives, but which match the Shroud preserved at Turin." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxvii).

"We are in Jerusalem around 348 A.D. The faithful throng the Rotunda, as the basilica built over the Holy Sepulchre was called. The Easter liturgy is taking place and St. Cyril [of Jerusalem c.315-386] is giving one of his splendid catechetical homilies. In order to understand this, it is necessary to explain the architecture of the basilica as it was then. Eusebius, an eye-witness, tells us that in order to carry out the plan of construction, it was necessary to destroy the first cave, in front of the sepulchre, thus leaving isolated the red rock with white veins which was shaped like a hillock; this enclosed the Holy Sepulchre, which was thus left open for all to see in its wonderful simplicity. In front of the humble square opening at which St. John bent to see the cloths lying on the ledge in the tomb, dug out of the rock and standing isolated lay the round stone moved aside by the Angel. This was the Holy Sepulchre that St. Cyril showed to his listeners as testimony of the resurrection of Christ. But he also added a list of burial clothes as evidence - shroud, bandages and sudarium - as objects well-known to his listeners, in no way different from the red rock flecked with white or the funerary niche or the round stone removed by the angel on the day of the resurrection, which was still in situ and indicated by the orator to his attentive listeners." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxix).

"It is in this period [AD 670] that we find an explicit testimony to the veneration and cult of the Holy Shroud. The text of Adamnanus, speaking of Arculfus, is clear on this point: `Among the multitude of the faithful who kissed it, he himself kissed it at the assembly of the Church'. (Chap. XI) `It was held with great devotion and venerated by all the people'. (Ibid.)" (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxxi-xxxii).

"The existence of a shroud `bearing a figure' in the community at Jerusalem, recorded in the sixth and seventh centuries, provides us with evidence of two unusual kinds of research, eye-witness accounts of which have survived to the present day. The first of these concerned the calculation and recording of the longitudinal measurement of the imprints in order to work out the height of Christ; this research was carried out at the request of the Emperor Justinian. The second investigation, however, limited itself to the measurement of the length of the shroud itself, and was carried out by Arculfus, a pilgrim to Jerusalem in 670. He specifically mentioned the `bigger' shroud, `which bore the figure of the Lord'." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxii).

"The testimony of Arculfus would be of greater value if one could ascertain the archaeological accuracy of the passage in which he says: `There exists (naturally in Jerusalem) a large church in honour of the Holy Sudarium of the Lord, which was put on his head and body in the tomb ....' (8) Now in this church, says Arculfus (chap. X of the book of Adamnanus, a Benedictine monk), `the Sudarium (that is `shroud', as the French referred to it) was kept in a casket (in scrinio), wrapped in another sheet. One day, our brother Arculfus (the author is still Adamnanus) saw it being exposed after it had been removed from the casket. He watched it being held up ('elevatum vidit'), and in the multitude of people kissing it, he also, in the midst of the assembly of the faithful, kissed it and measured its length [eight feet] ... (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxxi-xxxii. Ellipses original).

"Evidence to the fact that a shroud bearing a figure was kept in Constantinople ... dates from the year 1092, when the Emperor Alexis asked Robert, Count of Flanders, to take Constantinople, rather than let it fall into the hands of the pagans, since in that city were kept very precious relics of the Lord, including His burial clothes found in the sepulchre after His resurrection. A second piece of evidence dates from 1147, when the Shroud was exposed for the veneration of Louis VII, King of France." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxv).

"Again in 1157, the Abbot of Thingeyrar, Nicholas Samudarson, lists the Shroud among the relics then venerated at Constantinople: `there is the stone that was under the head of the Lord in the tomb, the bendages, the shroud and the blood of Christ'. In 1171, Amauri, King of Jerusalem, came to Constantinople to venerate the Shroud, and King Emmanuel Comnenus personally showed it to the distinguished guest." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxv).

"The description of Robert de Clary is also well-known. In 1203, he saw the Shroud exposed each Friday in the church of the monastery of Saint Mary of Blaquerne. It was exposed in such a way that both the front and back could be seen, leading us to believe that, since the Shroud was very long, it was shown folded in two so that it could be seen more easily." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxv).

"Today it appears quite easy to establish up to what time the Shroud remained in Constantinople. It was certainly still there in 1247, for in that year Baldwin II sent his cousin Louis IX of France a part of the Shroud (partem Sudaria). This generous off-cut, which was certainly done out of devotion by the cousin of the King of France, explains the considerable difference between the present length of the Shroud and that reported by Bishop Arculfus in Jerusalem (see below), whilst the measurements obtained in Jerusalem by Justinian's envoys, to calculate the height of the Lord, the accuracy of which measurements can today be checked and verified to the nearest centimetre on the Holy Shroud venerated in Turin, show how necessary it is to examine carefully the various pieces of evidence handed down over the centuries, in order to put into relief the salient points, supported by internal evidence, which are useful in establishing both the transmission of the object and its authenticity." (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxxv-xxxvi).

"The history of the handing down of the Holy Shroud should not be so much looked for in archives and in the silence of the early centuries - a silence which is frequently justified by the fact that Christological doctrine was still being developed, as well as by the persecutions and also by Jewish prejudices over legal impurity -, but rather in the Shroud itself: mainly in the extraordinary imprints, but also in the unfortunate mutilations (not only that of Baldwin II). As we see it today, it has clearly been cut across the whole width on the front side, immediately under the imprint of the feet, and a small piece (14 x 8 cm., or 5 1/2 x 3 inches) has been added on the left; on the back a strip (36 x 8 cm., or 14 x 3 inches) has been added on the lower left side." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxvi).

"Let us return for a moment to Constantinople in order to ascertain the final period in which the Holy Shroud was found there. The year 1261 marked the end of Latin rule in Constantinople and the year 1346 the fall of Smyrna, following a crusade in which Geoffrey I of Charney, Count of Lirey, took part as oriflamme-bearer. Geoffrey I would appear to have become the legitimate owner of the Shroud, having been presented with it by William de Toucy after the victory at Smyrna, as affirmed by his son Geoffrey II and grand-daughter Marguerite." (Ricci, 1981, pp.xxxvi-xxxvii. Typo "1436" corrected).

"In June 1353, Geoffrey I of Charny presented the Shroud to the chapter of canons which he himself had founded at Lirey near the city of Troyes. A few years later this same Geoffrey, after his liberation from English captivity, had fulfilled a vow to build the collegiate church of Lirey, and it was here that the Shroud was placed." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxvii).

"In 1453, the Shroud was handed over by Marguerite of Charny, by deed of notary (after obtaining the Brief of Assent from the Pope), to Anne of Lusignan, wife of Duke Louis of Savoy, in exchange for the use of and revenue from Castle of Mirabel and its estate. On the 22nd of March of that year the Shroud was transferred to Chambéry." (Ricci, 1981, p.xxxvii).

"A curious premise, but one which is not merely a curiosity, concerns the surplus length of this shroud. The present length is 4.36 x 1.12 metres (or 14 feet 3.8 inches x 3 feet 8.1 inches). Until 1247 it was said to be considerably longer: indeed, in that year the Emperor Baldwin II sent from Constantinople to his cousin Louis IX of France `a part of the Shroud which was wrapped round His body in the tomb' ... [De Breul, P., "Theatre des antiquites de Paris," Paris, 1639, p.135] Of this relic, a part was divided into small portions and sent to various churches and monasteries, and a part remained in Paris where it was placed in the Sainte Chapelle. Bergier speaks of this relic as `a large off-cut of winding-sheet' ... [Bergier, "Plan de la Theologie," Besançon, 1831]; this can also be inferred from the expression `part of the Shroud' ('partem Syndonis'), which is different from the normal expression `from the Shroud' ('ex Sindone') used for the tiny pieces which were the more usual relics." (Ricci, 1981, p.7).

"In connection with this we should remember the measurement of the Shroud carried out by Arculfus in Jerusalem in 670, when the `larger shroud' ('linteum maius') which bore the image of the Lord was `eight feet' in length. Today, with the information supplied by Arculfus, we can gain a fairly precise idea of this measurement. Arculfus also had the happy idea of measuring the ledge in the Holy Sepulchre, one of the few things still intact today. It measures 2.02 metres (or 6 feet 7.5 inches); Arculfus personally measured it as 7 feet, and thus his foot would be equivalent to 29 cm. (or 11.36 inches), corresponding to the ancient Roman foot. It is possible to conjecture on a second measurement of the Holy Sepulchre by excluding the marble covering which did not exist at the time of Arculfus, who said that he saw the rock out of which the cave was dug, still with the marks of the chisel. By taking as a unit of measurement the old Norman foot of 29.7 cm. (or 11.69 inches), we will have a ledge in the Sepulchre which is 2.079 metres (6 feet 9.9 inches) long, or about 8 cm. (3.15 inches) bigger. This, I think, is the measurement which gets closest to the actual length of the ledge as it was in the 7th century." (Ricci, 1981, pp.7-9).

"Thus, estimating a foot as 29.7 cm. (11.69 inches), if Arculfus were to measure the Holy Shroud today, he would say that one and a half feet were missing from the measurement he carried out in 670: this would be the about 40 cm. (15.76 inches) cut off by the Emperor Baldwin II in 1247. Eight feet, in fact, corresponded to 2.376 metres (7 feet 9.6 inches), a measurement which can be doubled to 4.752 metres (15 feet 7.2 inches), since because of its exceptional length the Shroud was obviously exposed for the veneration of the faithful folded in two, as was later done in Constantinople. The several centimetres' difference between the two calculations is unimportant considering the fact, obviously not foreseen by Arculfus, of the future cutting of the Shroud. The apparent difference between the present measurement and that of Arculfus, in fact, becomes a proof that the relic existing in Jerusalem in 670 was the same as the one kept at present in Turin, after it had been kept in Constantinople. The principal and most convincing proof of this is provided by the off-cut taken by Baldwin II." (Ricci, 1981, p.9).

"If we add to this the information given by Procopius about the life-size cross (crux mensuralis) of Justinian (527-565), a silver gilt cross made `to the shape of the body of Christ' ('ad formam corporis Christi') according to measurements taken by persons entrusted by him whom he sent to Jerusalem to measure the height of Jesus, we have a further proof. In fact, only from the figure impressed on the Holy Shroud, measured by adding the frontal and dorsal imprints, dividing by two, and subtracting 25 cm. (9.84 inches) for the soles of the feet, could they obtain the 180 cm. (5 feet 10.9 inches) which was the height of the life-size cross venerated in Constantinople, of which we have the size, scaled down, in the report of a pilgrim, made before its disappearance from the treasury of St. Sophia. [Pluteus, XXV, ms. 3, Laur., Florence] The same result can be obtained today by measuring in the same way the two imprints on the Holy Shroud: 204+208:2-25=181. These two proofs, which follow from a simple examination of the internal evidence, stir our curiosity, but also provide us with documentation of a span of fourteen centuries on the disputed problem of the handing down of the object in question." (Ricci, 1981, pp.9-10).

No comments: