Shroud of Turin description in Sermon from 944AD Constantinople!

www.Shroud.com ^ | August 15, 944 AD - Translated January 2004 | Mark Guscin - Gregory Referendarius, Archdeacon of Hagia Sophia

[Swordmaker]

A ". . . second paper is titled, "The Sermon of Gregory Referendarius, (PDF file, requires Adobe Acrobat Reader)" by Mark Guscin, a man familiar to many of you as the editor of the British Society for the Turin Shroud (BSTS) Newsletter. In this extremely important and just completed paper, Mark, an expert linguist and historian, translates (from the original Greek) the sermon given by Gregory Referendarius in 944. The sermon was pronounced on the occasion of the arrival of the Image of Edessa in Constantinople and was translated into English from the only known surviving manuscript of the sermon, recently rediscovered in the Vatican Archives by Italian classics scholar Gino Zaninotto. Not only are we extremely fortunate that Professor Zaninotto re-discovered the manuscript, but we are even luckier to have Mark Guscin, a truly brilliant classical scholar and linguist, working today in the world of Sindonology. There are very few people more skilled or better qualified to provide a trustworthy and accurate translation of such an important document. -- Barrie Schwortz, www.shroud.com

--------------------------------------

THE SERMON OF GREGORY REFERENDARIUS
By Mark Guscin
© 2004 All Rights Reserved

Excerpts from the paper and translated sermon...

On 15th August 944, the Image of Edessa, the ¢ceiropoi»toj image (not made by human hands), came to the imperial capital Constantinople from Edessa (today's Sanli- Urfa in Turkey). The feast day of the event is celebrated in the Orthodox Church on the following day, 16th August, and is generally overshadowed by the Dormition of the Virgin, celebrated on the 15th.

A sermon pronounced by Gregory Referendarius, Archdeacon of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople on the occasion of the Image's arrival in the city survives in one known manuscript in the Vatican Archives, recently rediscovered by Italian classics scholar Gino Zaninotto. The codex dates from the eleventh century. I have worked with microfilm copies of the manuscript to produce this translation, kindly supplied by Professor Daniel Scavone. . .

. . . The Image of Edessa and the Shroud of Turin

It was Ian Wilson who first brought to the world at large the theory by which the Image of Edessa could in fact have been none other than the Turin Shroud. The reasons behind the theory are explained in Wilson’s books on the Shroud, and need no further comment here. The main objection to the theory, still made by many today, is that the Image of Edessa is generally recorded as a facial image of Christ formed in life, either when he met the messenger sent by King Abgar and wiped his face on a cloth, miraculously leaving an imprint on it, or when he wiped his face with a cloth in the garden of Gethsemane, while sweating blood. This second theory of the legend of the image, found in the Official History attributed to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, written on or shortly after the arrival of the Image in the imperial capital in August 944, is proof that blood had been seen on the Image as the author was trying to find an explanation for this . . .

. . . The Gregory Sermon is precisely one of these texts. The author quite obviously knew that the Image of Edessa had both bloodstains and a side wound. He does abandon the idea of Jesus pressing a cloth to his face in reply to Abgar's letter and messenger, because he knows there is blood on the cloth – the slightly later Official History of the Image of Edessa offers both possibilities, again aware that there is blood on the cloth. He therefore concludes that the image must have been impressed onto the cloth when Jesus' sweat ran down his face like drops of blood in the garden of Gethsemane . . . However, this would not explain the blood from the side wound . . .

Excerpts from THE TEXT OF THE SERMON

Introduction
# 1 A sermon by Gregory the Archdeacon and Referendarius of the great church at Constantinople, about how incredible things are not subject to the laws of praise, and about how three patriarchs have declared that there is an image of Christ which was brought from Edessa 919 years afterwards by the zeal of a pious emperor, in the year 6452 (944AD). Lord bless us. . . .

[Relating the legend and creation of the Image of Edessa to the congregation]
. . . .But Jesus, undergoing the passion of his own free will, believing that human nature fears death – indeed death comes upon the very nature that was made to live – taking this linen cloth he wiped the sweat that was falling down his face like drops of blood in his agony. And miraculously, just as he made everything from nothing in his divine strength, he imprinted the reflection of his form on the linen. . . .

. . . The Image of Edessa is not a painting
# 21 He will do this straight away for us if we so desire, if we look upon the reflection and the immense beauty it is depicted with. For this is not the art of painting, which provides a door for the mind to consider the original and depicts images. This reflection was imprinted from a living original. Painting establishes a complete form with various beautiful colours, representing the cheeks with a blooming red, the encircling of the lips with red, it paints the beard with flowery gold, the eyebrow with shining black, the whole eye in beautiful colours, the ears and nose in a different way, overshadowing the flanks of the imprint with a compound of qualities and showing the chin with hair.

#22 This reflection, however – let everyone be inspired with the explanation – has been imprinted only by the sweat from the face of the originator of life, falling like drops of blood, and by the finger of God. For these are the beauties that have made up the true imprint of Christ, since after the drops fell, it was embellished by drops from his own side. Both are highly instructive – blood and water there, here sweat and image. Oh equality of happenings, since both have their origin in the same person. The source of living water can be seen and it gives us water, showing us that the origin of the image made by sweat is in fact of the same nature as the origin of that which makes the liquid flow from the side . . . .

-------------------------------

These are just excerpts from the paper and sermon. Please download the <a href="http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/guscin3.pdf>PDF file</a> and read the entire paper.

[Antoninus]

Another example of "charity" from the Western Church. It s really sad. That one act probably sealed the Schism permanently!

Please. That act was neither advocated nor endorsed by the Pope. He had no hand in it at all. It happened for the same reasons that many catastrophes happened in Byzantium--because religion and politics were ridiculously bound together by the doctrine of caesaropapism.

Look, we all agree it was a despicable act. However, in hindsight, the Byzantine Empire was tottering and under increasing pressure from the Turks and it's likely that ALL relics of Byzantine art and civilization might have been lost had not the Crusaders "liberated" a portion of it. I might also point out, that the "Western Church" displayed its charity quite clearly by furnishing the bulk of those soldiers who defended Constantinople during its final passion in 1453. The sacrifice of those men helped blot out the disgrace earned 250 years before.

If you're still holding a grudge after 800 years, I can't help you. Forgive and forget.

[Antoninus]

The Orthodox were allowed to keep their faith, and there was very little destruction of churches, etc. The Crusaders were much worse.

You're kidding, right? Exactly how many Christians are left in Istanbul today? Asia minor? Have you ever heard of the Church of the Holy Apostles? Is Hagia Sophia sitll a functioning Church today? Do you know what a Janissary was?

[TexConfederate1861]

I am aware of what happened to both of those churches, and NO, I am not saying the Turks were angels, but at LEAST they didn't slaughter Christians in the name of Christ, and by-in-large the Christians were allowed to be ruled by the Greek Patriarchate. (Which is STILL in Instanbul, and has a large Orthodox Population to this very day!)

[TexConfederate1861]

I agree that the Pope of Rome had very little if any to do with it. The Venetians were the main culprit if I recall. However the West sent VERY FEW troops to assist the Eastern Empire against the Turks, which is a main reason it fell. Now, no grudge on my part, but I don't sugar-coat the truth. And, if indeed the West repents it's past, then why not return the artifacts stolen from the Orthodox BACK to the Orthodox?

Not Likely Friend!

[Swordmaker]

And, if indeed the West repents it's past, then why not return the artifacts stolen from the Orthodox BACK to the Orthodox? Not Likely Friend!

Possession is nine tenths of the Law... Church Law...

[TexConfederate1861]

I believe the scripture says "thou shalt not steal" and I don't recall that it gives the Roman Church an exemption.

A thief is a thief....and the Crusaders were thieves. Wearing a cross or all the Holy Water in St. Peter's won't make it right.

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Note: this topic is from August 15, 944 AD, er, I mean, January 21, 2004. Thanks Swordmaker. Blast from the Past. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
·Dogpile · Archaeologica · Mirabilis.ca · LiveScience · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Discover · Bronze Age Forum · Science Daily · Science News · Eurekalert · PhysOrg · · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · · History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword · · Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · ·

[Flag_This]

"However the West sent VERY FEW troops to assist the Eastern Empire against the Turks, which is a main reason it fell."

The Crusades were initiated when the Eastern Empire begged the West for help. Relations between the two sides went south almost from the beginning at the siege of Antioch in 1098.

I would argue that the Crusades helped give the Eastern Empire an extra few hundred years of existence it wouldn't otherwise have had against the Turks.