Podcasts about ex cathedra

Andy Cameron, the self proclaimed Tartan King has popped over the border this week for a chat with your two favourite obese podders.Andy and his band Ex-Cathedra supported all the big hitters in the 90s, he laid down some dub with Suicide Bid in the Noughties and now, he's back with his new outfit Bullitz 23.We talk about being in a hit film, having yourself recommended to you by someone famous, potentially inspiring one of Rancid's songs and all the best Scottish venues and punk bands.Niall misuses the complaints procedure, Tom is excited for compering at Juddstock, we share yet another sneak peek at track from the upcoming Punk In Drublic tribute and Tom has a novel solution for over stimulation.Music this week comes from: Plow United, MUDFIGHT, TSOL, The Zipheads and The Crash Mats 

JOIN THE FREE SURRENDER NOVENA CHALLENGE HERE!  We start May 30 until June 7! Show Notes Do you feel like it's hard to be totally real with God? Do you have trouble calming your mind and letting go of your to do list to pray? Do you feel frustrated with yourself and wish you could just be better? Enter the Colloquy, a fancy word for “conversation” in St. Ignatius of Loyola's formula. It's a simple formula- literally 3 quick steps- anyone can use to have an authentic connection to the Lord. In the first few minutes I explain how to make a colloquy, then I move onto my own experience of making a colloquy. Jesus's love is unreal. In reading The Interior Castle I've had the good (hard) realization of how far I have to go before I'm ready for sainthood. Honesty is good, but I've felt so frustrated with myself lately. Jesus totally changed my heart and my outlook with his response. I hope my testimony gives you hope and encourages you to try making a colloquy Topics Discussed Ignatius of Loyola's Spiritual Exercises Sharing 3 of My Visions… What It's Like to Experience Visions  How Does God's Voice Actually “Sound”? St. Teresa's Rules for Discerning Whether Voices Come From God, Our Imagination, or the Devil  Thank you so much to everyone who has supported my ministry with the purchase of one of my beeswax candles! See my full collection with the Catholic All Year Marketplace here- my newest candle is called Ex Cathedra, based on St. Peter's Bascillica. With scents of lily, jasmine & seasalt, it's perfect as we head into summer! Come on over to my website for more resources for your spiritual life. Need a community? Come join my Patreon community for monthly video chats with Catholics from around the USA, and other perks! Your support starting at just $5/mo will help support the continued provision of my unique discernment content. 

Seguimos con las segunda parte de la audioserie titulada "Érase una vez el Este", en la que tras haber vivido una auténtica aventura en el sudeste asiático, concretamente a Myanmar, más conocida como Birmania, nos desplazamos a tierras españolas, también a tierras portuguesas como más adelante veréis, ya que vamos a visitar las hermosas tierras de Galicia. Este es el cuarto capítulo de esta segunda parte de la serie y el primero de las andaduras de nuestros protagonistas por tierras gallegas. Este capítulo lo hemos titulado "Una Tierra de Leyenda". Como ya sabéis los seguidores de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA que escuchasteis la primera parte ambientada en el conflicto entre Rusia y Ucrania, esta serie o audioserie en la que se mezclan la realidad y la ficción, consiste en una serie de programas en los que escucharéis como se habla de hechos reales que han sucedido en los últimos años y también en fechas recientes y no tan recientes esta vez en España. Como digo, es una audioserie muy conectada con la actualidad en los momentos en la que estamos presentándola. Y este proyecto de "Érase una vez el Este" que continúa con esta segunda serie, es idea como ya sabéis de dos grandes amigos de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA, como son Juan Lamas, malagueño, historiador, escritor y guionista, y Verónica, barcelonesa, actriz y cantante amateur y gran apasionada por la historia. Ellos son los artífices de esto y les agradezco su trabajo. *En este programa tenemos el placer de contar con la voz de el amigo Vladimir interpretando Vladimir. Os dejo con el cuarto capítulo titulado "Una Tierra de Leyenda". Sinopsis: Entre Galicia y Portugal, durante siete siglos, existió un enclave singular, el Couto Mixto. Quizá hubiera sido más sencillo explicarlo rápido, al grano y listo… pero ese no es el estilo de la Biblioteca de la Historia. A nosotros nos gusta complicarnos la vida. Porque de aquellos polvos vienen éstos lodos, es necesario retrotraernos a la antigüedad.. explicar la historia desde el principio. Comenzar a construir con cimientos fuertes… con sillares milenarios… como la propia Galicia. Las leyendas y las verdades se superponen, se mezclan de tal manera que nos cuesta diferenciarlas. Bienvenidos a ésta tierra de leyenda, pues en ésta ocasión, el cuento empezará diferente: “Érase una vez…. el Noroeste”. Este es un Podcast producido y dirigido por Gerión de Contestania, miembro del grupo "Divulgadores de la Historia". Somos un podcast perteneciente al sello iVoox Originals. Enlace a la web de "Divulgadores de la Historia": https://divulgadoresdelahistoria.wordpress.com/ Canal de YouTube de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfHTOD0Z_yC-McS71OhfHIA Correo electrónico: labibliotecadelahistoria@gmail.com *Si te ha gustado el programa dale al "Like", ya que con esto ayudarás a darnos más visibilidad. También puedes dejar tu comentario, decirnos en que hemos fallado o errado y también puedes sugerir un tema para que sea tratado en un futuro programa de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA. Gracias. Música del audio: -Entrada: Epic Victory by Akashic Records . License by Jamendo. -Voz entrada: http://www.locutordigital.es/ -Relato: Music with License by Jamendo. Noticias: -France 24 "En Galicia, los narcotraficantes son más poderosos y mueven más droga que nunca" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GfkC9UVhs8. -As Bestas. Tráiler. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0os-UZcgvo -Guardia Civil. Detenciones en España y Holanda vinculadas con la intervención de 2.300 kilogramos de cocaína. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji_5DenJEyg -El Mundo. Dos bandas de narcos protagonizan un tiroteo salvaje en Montpellier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMDFVZvsEiU -El Expectador. El precio de la cocaína se desploma por su sobreproducción. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhSAOu-JOKI -EFE. Intervenido un arsenal de armas de guerra de un grupo criminal holandés en Málaga. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faduj1lwSCE -La Sexta. Los agentes: "¡Retírense de la puerta, al suelo todos!" - Comandancias https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekoz5xoZk4Q -Antena 3. Luis Zahera aclara uno de sus titulares más polémicos. El Hormiguero. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYnVHhqqhYU -Athenaeumm Illustre. María Luisa Aguilar moderatrix oratores commendat 2/10 - 2013 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5G9gQdtSyY -Euro News. Países Bajos incauta una cifra récord en cocaína ocho toneladas en un contenedor de plátanos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvWIpWLiRMs -RTVE. POLICÍA NACIONAL incauta 11 TONELADAS de COCAÍNA en GALICIA y VALENCIA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9EuAQMtVLg Música. -Ex Cathedra. Rolandskvadet The Song of Roland. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOwFnBar4bk -Siniestro Total. Miña terra galega Sweet Home Alabama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqocsS2KCIg -Carmen Penim. Alalá dende Turín. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0os-UZcgvo -Cantiga de Amigo - Lírica Galaico Portuguesa (Música Medieval) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1M_VcqHoQ1M -Cantiga de Maio "O que da guerra levou cavaleiros" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzuDgdgH7CM -Fillas de Cassandra I. ANTÍGONA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1sJ4o6TAPo -Tyler Cunningham. Glory to Rome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc7FoTSzsfk -María do Ceo. Himno do Couto Mixto. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeyVXi_NBHk -Pino Donaggio. Io che non vivo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9d0_dBXABg -Abraham Cupeiro. KARNYX Música Edad de Hierro. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj5llma-qgw -Rheda. Mocro Mafia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY8dR-zD1C4 -Música Andalusí Wallada bint al Mustakfi. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVzeKXUDI8Q - Música Celta Gallega Alegre y Épica. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzEa1lomqos -Musica della Antica Roma Magna Mater Ercolano. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sp6RmZPbbI -Carlos Viola. Sobre Sus Costales. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaFSKHOOj1Q -Harpa Dei. TE DEUM Classical gregorian hymn. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkzzqcuMpEs -Moura Encantada. “Flores do verde pino” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwZR7Te_GQg Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Join the FREE Surrender Novena + Stretch Challenge here- we start May 30! Kick off your day with something good for your body and for your soul!   ADULT THEMES DISCUSSED! Morgan Swartz is my podcast guest today, folks! She was a participant on my True North Discernment group that I led back in the Fall of 2020 with people who wanted some extra discernment guidance after The God's Adventure Awaits Summit. Morgan is a bold and joyful woman for the Lord! She and I talk about being free in order to choose well and to really be able to seek the voice of God. We also discuss dating, listening to God/the Holy Spirit's inspirations in prayer, and what it means to trust God even in our struggle with brokenness and addictions. Morgan has a ministry called JoyinHope and a book called Out of Darkness, Into Light about her struggle with pornography and masturbation. Grab your new favorite brew and brace yourself for some deep, honest discussion about what it's like to go through addiction and healing, and hearing God's voice call you to do great things!   WATCH ON YOUTUBE HERE   Topics Discussed Online dating Developing a relationship with each person of the Blessed Trinity: How the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit heal us by showing us who we are Morgan's story of becoming addicted to porn and masturbation + her healing process from sin, shame and lies of the enemy Physical boundaries in dating The vital importance of an accountability partner and daily rosary Gaining bravery to share your story-even and ESPECIALLY the hard parts Resources Book: Out of Darkness, Into Light by Morgan Swartz Movie: The Shack Prayer: “God, show me who I am to You” Mini Lesson: Pope Francis' Discerning the Voice of God Morgan's Ministry: JoyinHope Morgan's Youtube: JoyinHope Morgan's YouTube Healing Playlist Our Lady of Fatima Ascension Presents: Mari Pablo   Thank you so much to everyone who has supported my ministry with the purchase of one of my beeswax candles! See my full collection with the Catholic All Year Marketplace here- my newest candle is called Ex Cathedra, based on St. Peter's Basilica. With scents of lily, jasmine & sea salt, it's perfect as we head into summer! Need a community? Come join my Patreon community for monthly video chats with Catholics from around the USA, and other perks! Your support starting at just $5/mo will help support the continued provision of my unique discernment content.

The GOAT(ham) is in the hotseat this week. Dan Goatham, top brass at Spoilers and bass slapper at Snuff is keen to fill you in about the latest records from his two projects, so strap yourself in!We also talk sitcoms, meeting one of your heroes, a Derby "local character", an epidemic of stripey bastards and life on the road.Tom's got a new skill, Niall is disappointed in the weather of his homeland and once again, we give YOU an exclusive sneek-peek at a track from the upcoming tribute to NOFX's Punk In Drublic, in what is it's 30th year.Music this week is from: Ex-Cathedra, Sick Of It All, Be Well, Regal Foul Émilie Plamondon and Gameover.

Hi Friends! God wants to speak to you, each of you. Because each of you are special to Him. Today I'm going to share a few of my experiences in prayer so that you know what is possible! I really hope that you enjoy my bold vulnerability in this episode in sharing a glimpse into some moments with the Lord where He was very clear with me (Because I need Him to be!) I hope this helps you to listen with expectation that Jesus will speak to you! Get all settled in with your favorite new mug and get ready to learn more about how God can speak to you! BUY THE PAINTING BY MY HUSBAND REFERENCED IN THIS EPISODE HERE WATCH ON YOUTUBE HERE Topics Discussed Rediscovering boldness in faith by our expectations of how God will speak to us in prayer. Saint friends: How they pray and what we can learn from them. How the Mercy of God meets us in prayer and helps us heal. Prayer visions and what they can look like. Growth through suffering: Why it's a gain! Resources St. Faustina St. Paul-Acts Ch. 9 Hebrews 13:5 St. Teresa of Avila Father Ripperger Last episode on God's Voice John's Painting in the YouTube Video-at 4:20 Nora 7 Sorrows of Mary Ephesians 6:12 Sacred Heart Our Lady Undoer of Knots Thank you so much to everyone who has supported my ministry with the purchase of one of my beeswax candles! See my full collection with the Catholic All Year Marketplace here- my newest candle is called Ex Cathedra, based on St. Peter's Bascillica. With scents of lily, jasmine & seasalt, it's perfect as we head into summer! Need a community? Come join my Patreon community for monthly video chats with Catholics from around the USA, and other perks! Your support starting at just $5/mo will help support the continued provision of my unique discernment content.

Como distinguir / identificar um pronunciamento ou ensinamento "ex-cathedra" feito pelo Papa de outro que não o seja? Uma "Encíclica" ou "Carta Apostólica" emitida pelo Papa é um ensinamento "ex-cathedra"? O Papa João Paulo II fez algum pronunciamento ou ensinamento "ex-cathedra"? se sim, cite alguns?

Rebecca Ledgard and Sarah Batten from Ex Cathedra, tell Patrick all about their various educational resources, including Choir Maker, designed to embed a love of singing with Year 7s.And legendary conductor Paul McCreesh gives some tips for running choir rehearsals, discusses Early Music in schools, and current and future Gabrieli Roar projects.https://www.singingplaygrounds.co.uk/choirmaker/https://excathedra.co.ukhttps://www.gabrieli.com/roar/about-gabrieli-roar/#CanDoMusic #GetPlaying

For more, go to https://twitter.com/BenPGothard Also known as Akiba, Liam is a journalist and editor of Blocklight at CryptoSlate. He believes that decentralized ledger technology has the potential to make widespread positive change. He predicts the next 10 years will bring in a dawn of a new age of technological innovation. Liam first got into crypto by mining Dogecoin after hours at his video production company in 2013. Since then he has become a 'blockchain maximalist' fascinated by all aspects of web3. Aside from journalism Liam has consulted for many digital businesses globally including Nike, Colgate, Suzuki, Vimto, and Manchester United. He has also written for film and TV with a focus on speculative fiction.

Julia Norgaard joins the Gwartney team this week to talk about the Pope and economics. Julia R. Norgaard received her Ph.D. from George Mason University where she was a Ph.D. fellow at the Mercatus Center and a graduate lecturer. In 2015, she received her master's degree in economics from George Mason University. Dr. Norgaard received her BA in economics with a minor in mathematics from the University of San Diego in 2012. Her interests include applied microeconomics and political economy as well as law and economics and development. Dr. Norgaard created and currently runs both the PEP Talks Research Seminar and the Economics Reading Group. She has a passion for both research and teaching economics. We really enjoyed this show and look forward to another show with Julia in the future. Enjoy the show! Timeline: The Pope knows his Econ - 1:00 There is no official training - 4:15 Popes Influenced from their backgrounds - 5:15 Pope Francis is less friendly to free markets - 7:40 Can't escape words out of the mouth - 8:15 Pope is 'American' - 11:30 Culture's effect? - 15:45 Some specific views - 17:30 It's important for the Pope to be in the discussion - 20:30 Are Pope's leading social trends - 24:30 What is Ex Cathedra? - 25:15 Shook it up - 32:00

A hour or so of festive awaits you in this aural banquet with dishes, lovingly prepared for the festive season, by artists such as Rufus Wainwright, Hop Wilson & His Buddies, The Monkees, Ren & Stimpy, Tom Lehrer, Ex Cathedra, pommelHORSE, The Godfrey Muth Sextette, The Point, Hop Wilson & His Buddies, The Philadelphia Brass Ensemble, Bob Rivers, Anna Sofie Von Otter, Kenny Wheeler, Lee Konitz, Dave Holland, Bill Frisell, Los Straitjackets and many more folks you've probably never have heard of. So ignore those carol singers and settle down on the sofa to an unforgettable (try as you might) Xmas X-perience (see what I shouldn't have done there?).

We consider the meaning of ex cathedra, from the chair in Roman Catholic thinking. Plus, we answer the question of just what we need to know in order to have peace with God.

Why does the Church need a hierarchy? Is the Pope always infallible? What is the role of people who aren't priests or religious in the Church?In this episode we discuss the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.This episode covers Part One, Section Two, Chapter Three, Article Nine, Paragraphs 3-5 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.Contact the podcast: crashcoursecatholicism@gmail.com.Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/crashcoursecatholicism/.....References and further reading/listening/viewing:John 14:16Matthew 16:13-20Peter Kreeft, "Chapter 7, The Holy Catholic Church" Catholic ChristianityA Complete Catechism of Catholic Beliefs Based on the Catechism of the Catholic ChurchPope Paul VI, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen GentiumThe Faith Explained, Chapter 11, The Catholic ChurchFr Mike Schmitz "Why Catholics Have a Pope"Fr Mike Schmitz "All Saints Day Pep Talk"Catholic Answers, "Papal Infallibility"Catholic Answers "How to Argue for Papal Infallibility"Catholic Answers, "Does Doctrine Change?"Catholic Encyclopedia, "The Pope"Catholic Encyclopedia, "Chronological List of Popes"Catholic Encyclopedia, "Ex Cathedra"History Answers, "How often does the Pope speak ex cathedra?"St Josemaria Escriva, "The Christian Vocation", Christ is Passing BySt Josemaria Escriva, "The Communion of Saints", The Way  St Josemaria Escriva, In Love With the ChurchAscension Presents, "Understanding the Authority of the Catholic Church"

Im Gespräch mit Matze. Wir reden über Glück, Langeweile, Stipendium in Tübingen, die knallbunte Schwarzwald-Klinik, polnische Live-Übersetzung im Kino, der graue Osten in den 80ern, Pommern, Sporttaschen voller Smarties, 1987 Flucht aus Polen, der polnische Fiat, 1986 erster Fluchversuch über Belgrad, klassische Wirtschaftsflüchtlinge, jobben in ner Fischfabrik in Köpenick, Bekannte in Rastatt, 7 Monate im Hotel in Gernsbach, ein Blues-Reggae-Festival im Ort der Oma, uncoole Teenager in Trainingsanzügen landen in Straßenschlachten, Metallica & Black Sabbath auf nem Tape vom Cousin, selbstbespielte Metal-Tapes von polnischen Märkten, über die Skater zu Bad Religion, Stress mit Dorffaschos, das JuBe in Baden-Baden, die erste Band Pole Position, Polski verlangte 1991 nach Punk-Postkarten, mit der 1. Band ABC Diabolo & Brieftauben & Wizo & Spermbirds covern, 1996 zum Punx Picnic nach Edinburgh mit Ex-Cathedra & Oi Polloi, der Anfang von Costa´s Cake House, ein The Make-Up Konzert in San Francisco, immer wieder in Liege spielen, die Karlsruhe-Mannheim-Connection, Wirtschaftsschule abgebrochen, bei Eric von Strain in der Radio Show Harvest & Refused & Eyeball kennengelernt, Zivildienst in der Lebenshilfe, Erzieherausbildung, der Versuch mit A Thin Red Line professioneller zu werden, dann es aber doch nicht zu fühlen, der Versuch einer Saint Vitus-mäßigen Band scheitert, hohe Erwartungen an Migrantenkinder, Flow-Momente bei Mönster, lange Schlagzeuger-Suche bis Iffi endlich kam, verrückte Touren durch Russland & Griechenland, rauchende Griech:innen, ein kurzes Zwischenspiel bei Elyjah, ein Hippie-Aussteiger im Schwarzwald, ein Showcase für Joko oder Klaas, Nothing startet gut, aber wird irgendwann unsichtbar, die aufregende China-Tour, ein WG-Zimmer für 80€, ein Sprung ins soziale Nichts, plötzlich "der Berliner" sein, eine Doku über Neo Rauch regt zum Nachdenken an, "Wer bin ich eigentlich?", Goat war eine wichtige Band, Rain/Mother ist Ostfriedsland, mit Garageband für 4,99€ aufnehmen, Utopia Union, ein neues Projekt mit Lennart, krachige Musik fühlt sich nicht mehr richtig an, Telecaster statt SG, im Gespräch mit den Söhnen mit sich selbst konfrontiert werden, Punk nicht auf einen Satz runterbrechen können, alles hinterfragen, der Versuch bedürfnisorientierter Erziehung, Chubby & The Gang, Kanaan, Top 5 Bands: Post Regiment, At the Gates, Bad Brains, Crucifix, Frank Zappa, sich nicht verbiegen müssen, uvm.

Sequences Podcast No 192 It’s been a hectic month so far delaying producing the usual two editions. So, here we have the latest, no 192, with the next one streaming at the beginning of June. A quick word on the new faces are Elderado Omega a dark ambient/drone project from Atlanta USA, Gydja, (Abby Helasdottir) on Winter-Light with expansive drones, woven through with intricate percussive elements unearthly vocals, and atmospheric field recordings, French composer and multi-instrumentalist Christine Ott weaves a unique dramaturgy between contemporary classical and electro-acoustic music, with Silver Galaxy a four-piece lineup fronted by Anna Maria Van Reusel a Berlin-based musician/producer working in a broad spectrum of sounds. From the archives comes a track from the album Ex Cathedra by Kubusschnit formed in 1999 on the base of WEirD by musicians of that group Andy Bloyce and Jens Peschke then adding Ruud Heij and Tom Coppens. Playlist No 192 02.02 Johan Agebjörn & Mikael Ögren ‘Monitoring The Zooids’ (album Artefact) www.spottedpeccary.com 08.56 Johan Agebjörn & Mikael Ögren ‘Passing The Gate’ 14.43 Hannah Peel ‘Ecovocative’ (album Fir Wave) www.hannahpeelmusic.bandcamp.com 18.26 Uwe Reckzeh ‘Transalpen’ (album Voyage) www.mellowjet.de 25.43 Eldorado Omega ‘Cloud World’ (album Out Of The Cloud-World) www.eldoradoomega.bandcamp.com 31.26 Levente ’Standing Stones’ (album Rituals) www.levente.bandcamp.com 36.58 Levente ‘Gravity Assist Manoeuvre’ *** 41.00 Steve Jolliffe ‘Lost & Returned’ (album Lost & Returned) *** https://stevejolliffe.wixsite.com/steve-jolliffe 51.42 Deborah Martin & Jill Haley ‘From Fire Into Water’ (album The Silence Of Grace) www.spottedpeccary.com 57.44 Kristen Miller ‘Meeting God In Heavy Boots’ (album Cello Journeys) www.higherlevel.media 01.01.10 Steve Roach ‘See Things’ (album Quiet Music) www.projekt.com 01.06.43 Steve Roach ‘The Green Place Part 2’ 01.14.45 Giant Skeletons ‘Secrets Of The Book Binder’ (album From Belkinrode To Bellingroth) www.giantskeletons.bandcamp.com 01.17.59 Giant Skeletons ‘Non-Place’ 01.20.40 Syndromeda ‘The Threat’ (album The Path Of Isolation) www.syngate.bandcamp.com 01.28.05 Kubusschnitt ‘Enter Through The Nave’ (album Ex Cathedra) *** www.kubusschnitt.bandcamp.com 01.37.29 David Wright ‘ The Lost Colony pt 1-V’ (album The Lost Colony) ***www.admusiconline.com 01.46.50 David Wright ‘Subconscious Matter and Other Indigenous Lifeforms’ 01.51.41 Radio Silence ‘Little Pixel’ (album Objective Linearity) www.andypickord1.bandcamp.com 01.59.23 Radio Silence ‘Anjikuni’ *** 02.04.11 Erez Yaary ‘Memoria Technica’ (album Memoria Technica) www.mellowjet.de 02.08.32 Erez Yaary ‘Post Human’ 02.14.21 Lisa Bella Donna ‘Electronic Study #26’ (album Tone Science Module No5 Integers & Quotients) 02.22.43 Gydja ‘Mjötvið mæran fyr mold neðan’ (album Ár var alda) https://winter-light.bandcamp.com/yum 02.31.08 Christine Ott ‘Time To Die’ (album Time To Die) www.christineott.bandcamp.com 02.40.00 Leopards Of White ‘Nyanza‘ (album Picta) www.leopardsofwhite.bandcamp.com 02.50.50 Silver Galaxy ‘Nocturnal’ (Silver Galaxy Live In Berlin) *** www.annamariavanreusel.bandcamp.com Edit ***

As he celebrates his 70th birthday, conductor Jeffrey Skidmore talks to Hannah French about his career in music and his life on tour and in the studio with the ensemble Ex Cathedra.

As we approach the holiday season, who better to take us on a guided tour through the history of the English choral tradition than Presto's own resident choral music expert, David Smith. David has been a church musician since the age of 8, and is currently a lay clerk at St. Philip's Cathedral Birmingham and a member of the vocal ensemble Ex Cathedra, as well as a writer for Early Music America.

Sean Rafferty is joined by the choir Ex Cathedra and folk supergroup The Melrose Quartet. He also pays tribute to Mariss Jansons, and Gabriela Montero improvises at the In Tune piano.

Van legal clinics tot eerstelijnsbijstand door studenten: de Vlaamse rechtenopleiding heeft de laatste jaren een opmerkelijke evolutie doorgemaakt. Het loutere ex-cathedra-onderwijs moet meer en meer het curriculum delen met innovatieve lesvormen en andere vormen van studentenparticipatie. Aan het begin van het nieuwe academiejaar belichten we twee recente maar zeer verscheiden initiatieven: een aan de KU Leuven, een aan de VUB.

Episode 4: Busting Shroud Myths, Part 2:  In one statement, John Walsh (His book The Shroud) observed: “The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence ... or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground.”  I did a recent - July, 2019 - survey of Baptist Pastors on The Shroud of Turin. Of those that responded to the poll - only 3.5 percent believed that the Shroud was the genuine burial cloth of Jesus. Half of them were agnostic - it was an interesting historical artifact that could not be verified, and just slightly under half 41 percent - believed the Shroud to be a forgery. I did a much larger poll in The Astonishing Legends facebook group - a group of people that are quite open and interested in paranormal things. In that survey, 132 out of 350 - 38 percent - believed the Shroud to be a hoax, which is very similar to the Baptist pastor's percentage. However, there were more true believers in the paranormal group, with 37 out of 350 - 11 percent - believing that the Shroud was the genuine burial cloth of Jesus. Shroud agnostics - believing the Shroud to be interesting, but unverifiable - represented 181 out of 350 respondents, just over half at 52 percent. Therefore, based on my informal surveys of a little over 400 people - roughly half of those respondents are just like me - uncertain about the Shroud. Over the next few episodes of this podcast, we are going to cover the history of the Shroud of Turin, and the most modern research and findings. Maybe by the time we are done, we'll all still be Shroud agnostics, but maybe - just maybe - we will together unearth enough information to change our minds and develop a clearer and more definitive view of one of the most controversial and noteworthy artifacts of church history.   Today, we are continuing to bust some myths about the Shroud. Next episode we will present 10-25 arguments in favor of the authenticity of the Shroud, some arguments against it, and likely conclude this series. Myth: The Shroud has always been owned by the Catholic Church, and they have officially endorsed it. In fact, it appears that the Catholic Church did not have official possession of The Shroud until 1983 when the royal House of Savoy conveyed ownership of The Shroud to The Holy See. If you remember your AP Modern European History, you might remember that the Savoys began as a small ruling family in the Alps northwest of Italy proper, and grew to become the dominant royal family in Italy, reigning over the country from 1861-1946, and also briefly ruled Spain in the 1800s. Although the Catholic church does not have an official position on The Shroud, several Popes and other church officials have commented favorably about it, including: Cardinal Ratzenberger/Pope Benedict, who called The Shroud, “A truly mysterious image, which no human artistry was capable of producing. In some inexplicable way, it appeared imprinted upon cloth and claimed to show the true face of Christ, the crucified and risen Lord".” (This was said when Ratzenberger was a Cardinal, and was not said officially/Ex Cathedra, so it was not considered an official endorsement of the whole church. Pius 11, 1936, “These are not pictures of the Blessed Virgin, it is true, but pictures that remind us of her as no other can. Since they are pictures of her Divine Son, and so, we can truly say, the most moving, loveliest, dearest ones that we can imagine."   What a strange quote - am I wrong that it seems to be suggesting that pictures of Mary, mother of Jesus, would be more remarkable than pictures of Jesus, the son of God? When any theology places more attention, emphasis and weight on Mary than they do on Jesus, this is where I have a massive difference with them. Source of quote “The Shroud, a Guide” by Gino Morreto. (I note here that I can't find this quote by Pius 11 elsewhere) Pope John Paul II  "Since it is not a matter of faith, the church has no specific competence to pronounce on these questions," the late Pope John Paul II said in 1998. ALSO:  “The Holy Shroud is the most splendid relic of the Passion and Resurrection [of Our Lord Jesus Christ]. We become what we contemplate... Why don't we contemplate the Icon of Icons: The Holy Face of Jesus!" Instead of icons made by man, let us venerate the greatest icon of all: The Holy Face of Jesus!” and also, “The Shroud is an image of God's love as well as of human sin ... The imprint left by the tortured body of the Crucified One, which attests to the tremendous human capacity for causing pain and death to one's fellow man, stands as an icon of the suffering of the innocent in every age." Most recently, Pope Francis commented on The Shroud during his first Easter address: Dear Brothers and Sisters, I join all of you gathered before the Holy Shroud, and I thank the Lord for offering us this opportunity, thanks also to new devices. We do not merely “look” if we are looking at it, it is not a simple look, but it is a form of veneration, a look of prayer and also it is a way of letting him look at us. This face has eyes that are closed, it is the face of one who is dead, and yet mysteriously he is watching us, and in silence he speaks to us. How is this possible? How is it that the faithful, like you, pause before this icon of a man scourged and crucified? It is because the Man of the Shroud invites us to contemplate Jesus of Nazareth.  This image, impressed upon the cloth, speaks to our heart and moves us to climb the hill of Calvary, to look upon the wood of the Cross, and to immerse ourselves in the eloquent silence of love. Let us therefore allow ourselves to be reached by this look, which is directed not to our eyes but to our heart. In silence, let us listen to what he has to say to us from beyond death itself. By means of the Holy Shroud, the unique and supreme Word of God comes to us: Love made man, incarnate in our history; the merciful love of God who has taken upon himself all the evil of the world to free us from its power.  This disfigured face resembles all those faces of men and women marred by a life which does not respect their dignity, by war and violence which afflict the weakest… And yet, at the same time, the face in the Shroud conveys a great peace; this tortured body expresses a sovereign majesty. It is as if it let a restrained but powerful energy within it shine through, as if to say: have faith, do not lose hope; the power of the love of God, the power of the Risen One overcomes all things. So, looking upon the Man of the Shroud, I make my own the prayer which Saint Francis of Assisi prayed before the Crucifix: Most High, glorious God, enlighten the shadows of my heart, and grant me a right faith, a certain hope and perfect charity, sense and understanding, Lord, so that I may accomplish your holy and true command. Amen. One Catholic commentator on St. Francis' speech above noted, “"The shroud draws [people] to the tormented face and body of Jesus and, at the same time, directs [people] toward the face of every suffering and unjustly persecuted person." This is condemning/damming the Shroud with faint praise and reinforces that Pope Francis really does think (wrongly) that the Shroud is just another fake icon.” I agree with that commentator - reading between the lines of St. Francis' pronunciation, speech, it is quite clear that he is either a Shroud Agnostic, or possibly even thinks it is a forgery.  So - it would seem that, in the Catholic church, the opinions on the authenticity of The Shroud are quite varied. It appears that more Catholic leaders consider The Shroud authentic than do leaders of other major religious groups, but the fact that The Vatican has stopped short of pronouncing the Turin Shroud should possibly give us pause. Do they have reason to suspect it is inauthentic - unreleased reasons? Possibly.  I'll say this - I don't understand religious veneration of objects. That seems completely contra to the clear teachings of the Old and New Testaments. Some branches of Christianity do this, but I think they are missing it. If The Shroud is authentic, then it is fascinating and wonderful, but not at all worthy of a single drop of religious devotion. If it is inauthentic, then it is less so.  Either way, it is a fascinating artifact.  If genuine, it is one of the great treasures of history and should be in our finest museum. Just don't worship it - it is a linen cloth. It didn't die for you. It has no power to save you. I see no indication that it holds any special significance to God. I own a collectible card with a verified piece of a jacket that Elvis Presley sang in and wore. If I had the whole jacket - what would that avail me? Would it help me dance better? Sing better? Become more famous? Could I bring it to Graceland and get free entry for wearing it? Could I take it to surviving members of Elvis' family, and ask to become an honorary Presley? None of those things. And The Shroud would get you less far in Heaven than The Presley jacket would get you in Graceland.  What should we do if it is inauthentic? Burn it, throw it away? Of course not! I still believe it belongs in our finest museums of art (as opposed to history) If it is art - it is incredible art. Mystifying and awe-inspiring.  Whatever it is - The Vatican isn't saying for sure one way, or another. They appear to be fans, but in a mostly unofficial capacity. Maybe Myth: The Shroud has been fully replicated. One of the major issues that has surrounded The Shroud from the beginning has been that, up until recently - even skeptics agreed that the way The Shroud was produced is unknown and thus postulating a medieval forgery was quite difficult, because nobody knew how a person could forge such an image with medieval equipment. There have been other ancient technologies that have been a mystery to modern man. Damascus steel, for instance, has not been inarguably replicated by modern blacksmiths. Roman Concrete has a kind of durability that modern concrete lacks, and scientists are only recently discovering some of the secrets to its longevity. Archimedes is said to have developed a sort of heat ray that was powerful enough to burn up boats from a significant distance away, but it is difficult for us to replicate such a ray using the technology that Archimedes would have had 200 years before the birth of Jesus. To that list, we should certainly add The Shroud, for if it is a forgery - it is an incredibly sophisticated, impressive and technologically advanced one. N.D. Wilson's amazing 2005 article in Christianity Today, entitled “Father Brown fakes The Shroud” is a must read for Shroud enthusiasts. Unfortunately, the only possible way to read it is to get your hands on that 2005 magazine in a library somewhere, or pay CT $30 for a digital subscription - which is what I did. 15 years ago N.D. Wilson supposedly figured out how one might fake The Shroud of Turin, and since that time, I have heard several people say or intimate that The Shroud had conclusively been proven a fraud with the 1-2 punch of #1 1988 medieval dating and #2 Wilson's reproduction. Wilson's method of duplicating The Shroud is ingenious. Basically, he and an artist friend painted a reverse image on a large pane of glass, and then had the sun shine through that image onto a Linen cloth over a period of several days. The sun bleached the cloth - lighter in areas of heavy paint and darker in areas of light paint. The resulting image does indeed look fairly authentic and Shroud-like to the naked eye. It does prove that it is possible, with the right equipment,  to put a negative-like image like The Shroud onto a linen cloth. Here are some objections that have been raised: 1. The cloth contains pollen from plants only found in Palestine - that would be difficult for a European forger to get. For one, he would have no idea that such a thing could potentially authenticate The Shroud. Wilson notes that the cloth could have been procured from a first century, Jewish grave, which I suppose is technically possible.  2. The figure in the Turin Shroud is pierced through his wrists, not through his hands. In recent years, it has been discovered that crucified people would have to have been pierced through their wrists (and not their hands) in order to actually be suspended from a cross. This does not at all contradict the Passion accounts in all four Gospels in the Bible, because the Greek word used for ‘hands' can also include the wrist area, unlike our English, which more clearly delineates between the two. Almost the totality of medieval art depicts the nails used during the crucifixion of Jesus being located in the hands, rather than the wrists. If the Shroud were a forgery, it is remarkable in the extreme that the forger would have known to include nail holes in the wrists, rather than in the hands. 3. I am not an expert on 1300s era glass technology, but some who are have argued that the kind of large and flat pane windows that would have been needed to sun-bleach the painted image of a man onto a large linen cloth would not have been available in the early medieval period. This is a fairly strong objection that I don't believe Wilson's article - as thorough as it is - addresses fully. 4. The figure on the Shroud has real wounds and real blood. This, of course, means that it was more than merely a sun-bleached image. Wilson contends that somebody had to have been murdered in order for forgers to make The Shroud using his method. Again, such a thing is technically possible. 5. It appears to some that the figure in The Shroud has coins in its eyes - and the type of coins appear to be first century coins that would have been commonly used in Israel during the time of Christ. That a medieval forger would be able to add such a detail is fairly astonishing. Of course, as with everything surrounding The Shroud, others (and Wilson, I presume) argue that there are no coin impressions in the eyes of the Shroud-figure. 6. Finally, if The Shroud is a forgery, those who painted the image on the glass had a remarkable and accurate knowledge of both the full details of Roman crucifixion and how the body would have responded to such crucifixion. Additionally, the anonymous forgers would have had to have a strong knowledge of anatomy and wound-effects, as the wounds on The Shroud figure are consistent with what modern medical technology would expect. Wilson contends that there were many medieval people with deep and accurate knowledge of anatomy, and the only reason we don't expect the forgers to have such knowledge is because we have a sort of bias against people from the past and assume they are unsophisticated and unintelligent. Such bias is certainly real, I will readily admit, though it does seem that medical history of the last 500 years demonstrates that medieval medicine and anatomy was indeed quite primitive. So - did Wilson definitively prove that medieval forgers could have produced The Shroud? Maybe, maybe not. Even Wilson admits, “I have not proved much. Or, I do not think that I have. Men and women who have believed in the Shroud will continue to believe. There is a fireman somewhere in Italy who risked his life to save the Shroud. I have a great deal of respect for that man. Perhaps I've given those who disbelieve more reason for noses lifted in the air, but I have not proved that the Shroud was faked. What I have done is crudely demonstrate that such an image could easily be produced in a matter of weeks by wicked men with no scruples, a little imagination, and a little more skill. The fact that it could have been faked does not mean that it was, though I believe it to have been. ”   I'll say this - Wilson's supposed forgers would have had to be: remarkably intelligent, gifted with art, well supplied with very rare (if existent) glass panes, and have an astonishing - for the time - knowledge of medicine, Roman history and human anatomy. Additionally, they would have had to be in possession of a cloth from Palestine, and possibly even pollen that had come from Palestine as well.  There have been other attempts to recreate the Shroud as well. In 2009 the University of Pavia organic chemistry professor and skeptic society member Luigi Garlaschelli produced a fairly convincing (at first glance) reproduction. He describes his attempt: "What you have now is a very fuzzy, dusty and weak image, Then for the sake of completeness I have added the bloodstains, the burns, the scorching because there was a fire in 1532." Garlaschelli says his work disproves the claims of the shroud's strongest supporters. "Basically the Shroud of Turin has some strange properties and characteristics that they say cannot be reproduced by human hands,"For example, the image is superficial and has no pigment, it looks so lifelike and so on, and therefore they say it cannot have been done by an artist." "The procedure is very simple. The artist took this sheet and put it over one of his assistants," "His good idea was to wrap the sheet over the person underneath because he didn't want to obtain an image that was too obviously a painting or a drawing, so with this procedure you get a strange image, Time did the rest,"  As you might imagine, there are several people who disagree that Garlaschelli has produced a convincing replica. Dr. Thibault Heimburger has written an extensive and scientific rebuttal of Garlaschelli's method, essentially arguing that it does not really duplicate all of the elements of the Shroud, but is only a superficial likeness. His paper, linked in the shownotes, concludes:  L.G. concluded: “We have also shown that pigments containing traces of acidic compounds can be artificially aged after the rubbing step (…) in such a way that, when the pigment is washed away, an image is obtained having the expected characteristics as the Shroud of Turin. In particular the image is pseudo negative, is fuzzy with half-tones, resides on the top-most fibers of the cloth, has some 3D embedded properties and does not fluoresce”. I think to the contrary that the image has none of these characteristics (except negativity and nonfluorescence). L.G. used a sophisticated method and a new interesting hypothesis, and he got the best Shroud-like image today. It is interesting to notice that even so, the properties of his image remain in fact very far from the fundamental properties of the Shroud image. 9 For the moment, the Shroud image remains unfakeable. Source: https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/thibault-lg.pdf Shroud blogger Stephen Jones has also debunked the replication of Garlaschelli: http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2018/08/my-critique-of-borrini-m-garlaschelli-l.html  3. The complex herringbone twill pattern of the Shroud was not possible in the first century.  Some Shroud skeptics have speculated that the particular pattern of sewing used on the Shroud is too complex and advanced have been created in the first century.  In the Summer of 2000, archaeologists James Tabor and Shimon Gibson stumbled upon a freshly robbed first century grave outside of Jerusalem. Amazingly, the grave still had bodies in it, and one of them was encased in a somewhat intact first century shroud - the first shroud of that era that has been recovered in or around Jerusalem. Tabor writes of this discovery in a way that is very dismissive of the Turin Shroud:  Although 1st century cloth has been found at Masada and in caves in the Judean Desert, nothing of this sort had ever been found in Jerusalem. Apparently that niche, sealed with a blocking stone, had a geological fissure that kept water from seeping in and rotting the material. The tomb had any number of interesting features. DNA studies were done on all the individuals represented in the tomb—the first time, so far as we know, that this had even been done in an ancient Jerusalem tomb of this period. Textile analysis was done on the cloth—it turned out to be a mixture of linen and wool, not woven together but layered with a separate head piece. It had a distinctive 1st century weave—in contrast to the Shroud of Turin.  News articles from major sites like BBC and CNN concluded that this was yet more evidence that the Shroud was a fake. From the CNN article:  “And in addition, the weave of the shroud raises fresh doubts about the Shroud of Turin, which many people believe was used to wrap the body of Jesus. According to researchers involved in the excavation and subsequent testing, the recently discovered shroud lends more credible evidence that the Shroud of Turin does not date to Roman times when Jesus died but from a later period.” SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/16/mideast.ancient.shroud/index.html However, it should be noted that none of the researchers actually engaged in much textile research, nor were they textile experts. They were simply taking the design and weave  of one 1st century burial cloth and concluding that all other 1st century burial cloths from that area would have a similar weave-pattern. That seems plausible at first, but it turns out that it is not true.  Hamburg textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg is a recognized art historian and expert on the restoration of ancient textiles. She was able to examine and work on restoration/repair of the Shroud in 2001/2002 and published a book on it. She concludes on chapter of that book by saying:  “The seam that connects the 8 cm wide strip to the larger segment is not a simple one. The type of seam construction chosen clearly displays the intention to make the seam disappear on the face of the cloth as much as possible. This is another reason to believe that the Shroud was planned and produced by professionals. The sewing has been done from the reverse of the fabric and the stitches have been executed with great care and are barely noticeable on the face of the Shroud. The seam appears flat on the face and raised like a roll on the reverse of the fabric . Examples of this same kind of seam are again to be found among the textile fragments of Masada, already mentioned above. To conclude this chapter it can be said that the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which speak against its origin as a high quality product of the textile workers of the first century A.D.” SOURCE: Sindon by Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, pages 59-60, December 2001. John Tyerer, a chartered textile technologist, “It would be reasonable to conclude the linen textiles with ‘Z' twist yarns and woven 3/1 reversing twill similar to the Turin Shroud could have been produced in the first century Syria or Palestine.” (Source: The Shroud and The Controversy by Gary Habermas and Kenneth E. Stevenson, pg. 69)  4. The Shroud was myth-busted by John Calvin, among many others, who show us that The Scripture demands TWO burial cloths (one for the head, one for the body) and not ONE.  The Sudarium of Oviedo, long believed to be the "napkin" that was wrapped around Our Lord's head after His crucifixion and death, has been shown to have 120 "points of coincidence" with the Shroud, including the same AB blood type. Researchers assert, "The only possible conclusion is that the Oviedo sudarium covered the same face as the Turin Shroud." John Calvin:  4 Arguments against The Shroud:  THERE ARE MULTIPLE ‘SHROUDS' THAT CLAIM TO BE GENUINE.   It is now time to treat of the “sudary,” about which relic they have displayed their folly even more than in the affair of the holy coat; for besides the sudary of Veronica, which is shown in the Church of St Peter at Rome, it is the boast of several towns that they each possess one, as for instance Carcassone, Nice, Aix-la-Chapelle, Tréves, Besançon, without reckoning the fragments to be seen in various places.Now, I ask whether those persons were not bereft of their senses who could take long pilgrimages, at much expense and fatigue, in order to see sheets, of the reality of which there were no reasons to believe, but many to doubt; for whoever admitted the reality of one of these sudaries shown in so many places, must have considered the rest as wicked impostures set up to deceive the public by the pretence that they were each the real sheet in which Christ's body had been wrapped.  Answer: That counterfeits exist does not at all prove that there is no genuine article. Rather, a counterfeit shroud (or three) can be a fairly convincing proof that - at least at one time - there was a significant genuine shroud. 2. THE BIBLE DOES NOT RECORD A CLOTH WITH AN IMPRESSION ON IT.  St John, in his Gospel, relates even how St Peter, having entered the sepulchre, saw the linen clothes lying on one side, and the napkin that was about his head on the other; but he does not say that there was a miraculous impression of our Lord's figure upon these clothes, and it is not to be imagined that he would have omitted to mention such a work of God if there had been any thing of this kind. Answer: John 21:25 25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which, if they were written one by one, I suppose not even the world itself could contain the books that would be written.  This is a clear argument from silence. That doesn't mean it carries now weight - it does indeed carry some weight...but not enough to actually disprove the veracity of the Shroud. It should be pointed out that the miracle of the Shroud IF it happened and IF it was noticed by the ladies or the disciples would NOT have been all that significant in comparison to the resurrection of Jesus or the appearance of angels at the tomb. One can quite easily answer this argument from silence with another plausible argument from silence, and it is one I've not heard before. Consider how short, relatively speaking, each of the Gospels are - the Longest is Luke, checking in at just under 20000 words. In total, all four Gospels are approximately 65,000 words - not very lengthy. This is about the size of a shortish paper-back novel.  Given the relative brevity of these accounts, I find it remarkable that ALL FOUR Gospels mention the grave clothes of Jesus. Why? It would seem there would be little reason to record any details about the grave clothes unless...possibly...something remarkable happened to them. Now - is that argument enough to convince a skeptic? Of course not - because it is a very, very weak argument! So is Calvin's argument here that the Gospels would have mentioned it if something miraculous happened with the grave-wrapping of Jesus.  3. THE CLOTHES WERE GUARDED AND LEFT IN THE GRAVE.  Another point to be observed is, that the evangelists do not mention that either of the disciples or the faithful women who came to the sepulchre had removed the clothes in question, but, on the contrary, their account seems to imply that they were left there. Now, the sepulchre was guarded by soldiers, and consequently the clothes were in their power. Is it possible that they would have permitted the disciples to take them away as relics, since these very men had been bribed by the Pharisees to perjure themselves by saying that the disciples had stolen the body of our Lord ?  This one is not terribly difficult to answer. None of the gospels record the detail of removing the clothing, which could be because they did indeed remove it, but did not notice an image imprinted on it. It is highly unlikely they would have left cloth behind in the grave for reasons both sentimental and practical. As well, it should be noted that the Gospels do not record the presence of a guard at the tomb AFTER the resurrection of Jesus.  4. THE SHROUD IS ONE CLOTH AND THE BIBLE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT TWO CLOTHS SERVED TO BURY JESUS. I shall conclude with a convincing proof of the audacity of the Papists. Wherever the holy sudary is exhibited, they show a large sheet with the full-length likeness of a human body on it. Now, St John's Gospel, chapter nine teenth, says that Christ was buried according to the manner of the Jews ; and what was their custom ? This may be known by their present custom on such occasions, as well as from their books, which describe the ancient ceremony of interment, which was to wrap the body in a sheet, to the shoulders, and to cover the head with a separate cloth. This is precisely how the evangelist described it, saying, that St Peter saw on one side the clothes with which the body had been wrapped, and on the other the napkin from about his head. In short, either St John is a liar, or all those who boast of possessing the holy sudary are convicted of falsehood and deceit. * * This is probably Calvin's most well known argument contra the Shroud and the one that I hear most well-educated Protestants make when I bring up the Shroud to them That the Bible suggests a plurality of gravecloths, but the Shroud is only one cloth. On the surface, this might seem like a pretty compelling claim against the Shroud, but it is not quite as open and shut as Calvin would have us believe.  The most relevant passage in the Bible to this discussion is John 20:  6 Then, following him, Simon Peter came also. He entered the tomb and saw the linen cloths lying there. 7 The wrapping that had been on His head was not lying with the linen cloths but was folded up in a separate place by itself. Pretty clear, right - according to John's Gospel, there were not ONE but TWO burial cloths that wrapped Jesus. One, mentioned in vs 6 (Greek: ὀθόνια (othonia)/PLURAL)  and the other in verse 7 - a cloth wrapped around Jesus' head. (Greek: σουδάριον Soudarion)  Here's the thing, though - Many Shroud researchers, including Kenneth Stevenson, Gary Habermas, Ian Wilson, Barrie Schwortz and others contend that the Shroud shows evidence that there was a head cloth wrapped around the Shroud figure's neck and head - most likely to hold the jaw in place.  It would appear that the Sudarion was not a very significant part of the grave cloths that wrapped Jesus, as Matthew, Mark and Luke do not mention it in particular. Consider:  Mark 15:46 46 After he bought some fine linen, he took Him down and wrapped Him in the linen. Then he placed Him in a tomb cut out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the entrance to the tomb. Luke 23:53 and 24:12  52 He approached Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. 53 Taking it down, he wrapped it in fine linen and placed it in a tomb cut into the rock, where no one had ever been placed...12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. When he stooped to look in, he saw only the linen cloths. So he went home, amazed at what had happened. And Matthew 27: 59 So Joseph took the body, wrapped it in clean, fine linen, 60 and placed it in his new tomb, which he had cut into the rock. He left after rolling a great stone against the entrance of the tomb. So, the three synoptic gospels - Matthew, Mark and Luke - don't mention the head-wrapping, or the sudarion, but John does. Could this indicate that the sudarion was a smaller garment - one that would not have left much of an imprint on the Shroud? Possibly. But, again, I emphasize - The Shroud seems to allow for the existence of a head-scarf type wrapping, as well as ones around the wrists and feet. Rather than the Biblical account disproving The Shroud, it actually seems to describe it quite well. 5. THE ABUNDANCE OF FAKE RELICS PUT FORWARD BY MEDIEVAL CATHOLICS PROVES THE SHROUD IS ALSO FAKE.  St Honoratus has a body at Arles, and another at the island of Lerins, near Antibes.St Giles has a body at Toulouse, and a second in a town bearing his name in Languedoc.I could quote an infinite number of similar cases. I think that the exhibitors of these relics should at least have made some arrangement amongst themselves the better to conceal their barefaced impostures. Something of this sort was managed between the canons of Trêves and those of Liége about St Lambert's head. They compounded, for a sum of money, not to show publicly the head in their possession, in order to avoid the natural surprise of the public at the same relic being seen in two different towns situated so near to each other. But, as I have already remarked at the commencement of this treatise, the inventors of these frauds never imagined anyone could be found bold enough to speak out and expose their deceptions. This is really more of a subset of argument #1, and it is a fairly strong argument. However, it must be said that not every statement made by a dishonest person is a lie, and it is perfectly possible that not every relic claimed by the medieval Catholic church was fake. Most likely were. Were they ALL fake?  I'm not convinced they were.  So - Hopefully you've enjoyed this little bit of busting myths.  You can probably tell that I want the Shroud to be the real thing. There's several reasons for this, but none of them are apologetics-related. In other words, I don't want the Shroud to be the real burial cloth of Jesus because I think that would help prove the Bible to be reliable, or Jesus to be the resurrected Son of God. No article could prove such a thing. I do, however, want the Shroud to be real and genuine in the same sort of way that I want there to be a real Loch Ness Monster, or an extant Holy Grail somewhere out there. The world is a more interesting place with a legit Nessie swimming around in the cold waters of Scotland, and it is a more interesting place with real, tangible artifacts from the time of Jesus. Does that bias me? Possibly it does, and I don't want to enter this discussion biased. It does make me consider the claims of debunkers with a greater skepticism, however, and that might not be a bad thing.  I love John Calvin and am quite persuaded by his soteriological leanings in the realm of theology. That said, I believe his debunking of The Shroud is somewhat ham-handed, especially his contention that it is easily proved false by John 20 argument that the Bible says there were two different kinds of grave-clothes. I believe that there were indeed two different kinds of graveclothes used on Jesus - the Bible is explicit about this - there was a linen cloth that the body of Jesus was wrapped in, and a head covering (of some sort) that went along with it. That said, the Shroud appears to show evidence of there being a head scarf or head wrapping of some sort, and even if it didn't, one could easily see how the Shroud figure could have been wrapped in more than one cloth. I have little patience for people who believe the extraordinary simply because somebody told them it was so - gullibility is delightful in children, but unbecoming and unsophisticated in adults. I also have little patience for those who claim to debunk complex objects and possibilities with overly-simplistic and reductionist arguments. It is definitely possible - even plausible - that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery, but the fact that John 20:7 mentions a sudarion that was on the head of Jesus does not necessarily debunk the authenticity of The Shroud in any sore of logical, philosophical or archaeological way.  Ok - that was a long episode. ONE more Shroud episode coming up - a summation of sorts. I hope to have 20-25 reasons to believe the Shroud could be authentic as well as a number of reasons to NOT believe in the authenticity of The Shroud. Thanks for being patient, and thanks for listening. Please leave a positive review if you are so inclined. 

Episode 4: Busting Shroud Myths, Part 2:  In one statement, John Walsh (His book The Shroud) observed: “The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence ... or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground.”  I did a recent - July, 2019 - survey of Baptist Pastors on The Shroud of Turin. Of those that responded to the poll - only 3.5 percent believed that the Shroud was the genuine burial cloth of Jesus. Half of them were agnostic - it was an interesting historical artifact that could not be verified, and just slightly under half 41 percent - believed the Shroud to be a forgery. I did a much larger poll in The Astonishing Legends facebook group - a group of people that are quite open and interested in paranormal things. In that survey, 132 out of 350 - 38 percent - believed the Shroud to be a hoax, which is very similar to the Baptist pastor's percentage. However, there were more true believers in the paranormal group, with 37 out of 350 - 11 percent - believing that the Shroud was the genuine burial cloth of Jesus. Shroud agnostics - believing the Shroud to be interesting, but unverifiable - represented 181 out of 350 respondents, just over half at 52 percent. Therefore, based on my informal surveys of a little over 400 people - roughly half of those respondents are just like me - uncertain about the Shroud. Over the next few episodes of this podcast, we are going to cover the history of the Shroud of Turin, and the most modern research and findings. Maybe by the time we are done, we'll all still be Shroud agnostics, but maybe - just maybe - we will together unearth enough information to change our minds and develop a clearer and more definitive view of one of the most controversial and noteworthy artifacts of church history.   Today, we are continuing to bust some myths about the Shroud. Next episode we will present 10-25 arguments in favor of the authenticity of the Shroud, some arguments against it, and likely conclude this series. Myth: The Shroud has always been owned by the Catholic Church, and they have officially endorsed it. In fact, it appears that the Catholic Church did not have official possession of The Shroud until 1983 when the royal House of Savoy conveyed ownership of The Shroud to The Holy See. If you remember your AP Modern European History, you might remember that the Savoys began as a small ruling family in the Alps northwest of Italy proper, and grew to become the dominant royal family in Italy, reigning over the country from 1861-1946, and also briefly ruled Spain in the 1800s. Although the Catholic church does not have an official position on The Shroud, several Popes and other church officials have commented favorably about it, including: Cardinal Ratzenberger/Pope Benedict, who called The Shroud, “A truly mysterious image, which no human artistry was capable of producing. In some inexplicable way, it appeared imprinted upon cloth and claimed to show the true face of Christ, the crucified and risen Lord".” (This was said when Ratzenberger was a Cardinal, and was not said officially/Ex Cathedra, so it was not considered an official endorsement of the whole church. Pius 11, 1936, “These are not pictures of the Blessed Virgin, it is true, but pictures that remind us of her as no other can. Since they are pictures of her Divine Son, and so, we can truly say, the most moving, loveliest, dearest ones that we can imagine."   What a strange quote - am I wrong that it seems to be suggesting that pictures of Mary, mother of Jesus, would be more remarkable than pictures of Jesus, the son of God? When any theology places more attention, emphasis and weight on Mary than they do on Jesus, this is where I have a massive difference with them. Source of quote “The Shroud, a Guide” by Gino Morreto. (I note here that I can't find this quote by Pius 11 elsewhere) Pope John Paul II  "Since it is not a matter of faith, the church has no specific competence to pronounce on these questions," the late Pope John Paul II said in 1998. ALSO:  “The Holy Shroud is the most splendid relic of the Passion and Resurrection [of Our Lord Jesus Christ]. We become what we contemplate... Why don't we contemplate the Icon of Icons: The Holy Face of Jesus!" Instead of icons made by man, let us venerate the greatest icon of all: The Holy Face of Jesus!” and also, “The Shroud is an image of God's love as well as of human sin ... The imprint left by the tortured body of the Crucified One, which attests to the tremendous human capacity for causing pain and death to one's fellow man, stands as an icon of the suffering of the innocent in every age." Most recently, Pope Francis commented on The Shroud during his first Easter address: Dear Brothers and Sisters, I join all of you gathered before the Holy Shroud, and I thank the Lord for offering us this opportunity, thanks also to new devices. We do not merely “look” if we are looking at it, it is not a simple look, but it is a form of veneration, a look of prayer and also it is a way of letting him look at us. This face has eyes that are closed, it is the face of one who is dead, and yet mysteriously he is watching us, and in silence he speaks to us. How is this possible? How is it that the faithful, like you, pause before this icon of a man scourged and crucified? It is because the Man of the Shroud invites us to contemplate Jesus of Nazareth.  This image, impressed upon the cloth, speaks to our heart and moves us to climb the hill of Calvary, to look upon the wood of the Cross, and to immerse ourselves in the eloquent silence of love. Let us therefore allow ourselves to be reached by this look, which is directed not to our eyes but to our heart. In silence, let us listen to what he has to say to us from beyond death itself. By means of the Holy Shroud, the unique and supreme Word of God comes to us: Love made man, incarnate in our history; the merciful love of God who has taken upon himself all the evil of the world to free us from its power.  This disfigured face resembles all those faces of men and women marred by a life which does not respect their dignity, by war and violence which afflict the weakest… And yet, at the same time, the face in the Shroud conveys a great peace; this tortured body expresses a sovereign majesty. It is as if it let a restrained but powerful energy within it shine through, as if to say: have faith, do not lose hope; the power of the love of God, the power of the Risen One overcomes all things. So, looking upon the Man of the Shroud, I make my own the prayer which Saint Francis of Assisi prayed before the Crucifix: Most High, glorious God, enlighten the shadows of my heart, and grant me a right faith, a certain hope and perfect charity, sense and understanding, Lord, so that I may accomplish your holy and true command. Amen. One Catholic commentator on St. Francis' speech above noted, “"The shroud draws [people] to the tormented face and body of Jesus and, at the same time, directs [people] toward the face of every suffering and unjustly persecuted person." This is condemning/damming the Shroud with faint praise and reinforces that Pope Francis really does think (wrongly) that the Shroud is just another fake icon.” I agree with that commentator - reading between the lines of St. Francis' pronunciation, speech, it is quite clear that he is either a Shroud Agnostic, or possibly even thinks it is a forgery.  So - it would seem that, in the Catholic church, the opinions on the authenticity of The Shroud are quite varied. It appears that more Catholic leaders consider The Shroud authentic than do leaders of other major religious groups, but the fact that The Vatican has stopped short of pronouncing the Turin Shroud should possibly give us pause. Do they have reason to suspect it is inauthentic - unreleased reasons? Possibly.  I'll say this - I don't understand religious veneration of objects. That seems completely contra to the clear teachings of the Old and New Testaments. Some branches of Christianity do this, but I think they are missing it. If The Shroud is authentic, then it is fascinating and wonderful, but not at all worthy of a single drop of religious devotion. If it is inauthentic, then it is less so.  Either way, it is a fascinating artifact.  If genuine, it is one of the great treasures of history and should be in our finest museum. Just don't worship it - it is a linen cloth. It didn't die for you. It has no power to save you. I see no indication that it holds any special significance to God. I own a collectible card with a verified piece of a jacket that Elvis Presley sang in and wore. If I had the whole jacket - what would that avail me? Would it help me dance better? Sing better? Become more famous? Could I bring it to Graceland and get free entry for wearing it? Could I take it to surviving members of Elvis' family, and ask to become an honorary Presley? None of those things. And The Shroud would get you less far in Heaven than The Presley jacket would get you in Graceland.  What should we do if it is inauthentic? Burn it, throw it away? Of course not! I still believe it belongs in our finest museums of art (as opposed to history) If it is art - it is incredible art. Mystifying and awe-inspiring.  Whatever it is - The Vatican isn't saying for sure one way, or another. They appear to be fans, but in a mostly unofficial capacity. Maybe Myth: The Shroud has been fully replicated. One of the major issues that has surrounded The Shroud from the beginning has been that, up until recently - even skeptics agreed that the way The Shroud was produced is unknown and thus postulating a medieval forgery was quite difficult, because nobody knew how a person could forge such an image with medieval equipment. There have been other ancient technologies that have been a mystery to modern man. Damascus steel, for instance, has not been inarguably replicated by modern blacksmiths. Roman Concrete has a kind of durability that modern concrete lacks, and scientists are only recently discovering some of the secrets to its longevity. Archimedes is said to have developed a sort of heat ray that was powerful enough to burn up boats from a significant distance away, but it is difficult for us to replicate such a ray using the technology that Archimedes would have had 200 years before the birth of Jesus. To that list, we should certainly add The Shroud, for if it is a forgery - it is an incredibly sophisticated, impressive and technologically advanced one. N.D. Wilson's amazing 2005 article in Christianity Today, entitled “Father Brown fakes The Shroud” is a must read for Shroud enthusiasts. Unfortunately, the only possible way to read it is to get your hands on that 2005 magazine in a library somewhere, or pay CT $30 for a digital subscription - which is what I did. 15 years ago N.D. Wilson supposedly figured out how one might fake The Shroud of Turin, and since that time, I have heard several people say or intimate that The Shroud had conclusively been proven a fraud with the 1-2 punch of #1 1988 medieval dating and #2 Wilson's reproduction. Wilson's method of duplicating The Shroud is ingenious. Basically, he and an artist friend painted a reverse image on a large pane of glass, and then had the sun shine through that image onto a Linen cloth over a period of several days. The sun bleached the cloth - lighter in areas of heavy paint and darker in areas of light paint. The resulting image does indeed look fairly authentic and Shroud-like to the naked eye. It does prove that it is possible, with the right equipment,  to put a negative-like image like The Shroud onto a linen cloth. Here are some objections that have been raised: 1. The cloth contains pollen from plants only found in Palestine - that would be difficult for a European forger to get. For one, he would have no idea that such a thing could potentially authenticate The Shroud. Wilson notes that the cloth could have been procured from a first century, Jewish grave, which I suppose is technically possible.  2. The figure in the Turin Shroud is pierced through his wrists, not through his hands. In recent years, it has been discovered that crucified people would have to have been pierced through their wrists (and not their hands) in order to actually be suspended from a cross. This does not at all contradict the Passion accounts in all four Gospels in the Bible, because the Greek word used for ‘hands' can also include the wrist area, unlike our English, which more clearly delineates between the two. Almost the totality of medieval art depicts the nails used during the crucifixion of Jesus being located in the hands, rather than the wrists. If the Shroud were a forgery, it is remarkable in the extreme that the forger would have known to include nail holes in the wrists, rather than in the hands. 3. I am not an expert on 1300s era glass technology, but some who are have argued that the kind of large and flat pane windows that would have been needed to sun-bleach the painted image of a man onto a large linen cloth would not have been available in the early medieval period. This is a fairly strong objection that I don't believe Wilson's article - as thorough as it is - addresses fully. 4. The figure on the Shroud has real wounds and real blood. This, of course, means that it was more than merely a sun-bleached image. Wilson contends that somebody had to have been murdered in order for forgers to make The Shroud using his method. Again, such a thing is technically possible. 5. It appears to some that the figure in The Shroud has coins in its eyes - and the type of coins appear to be first century coins that would have been commonly used in Israel during the time of Christ. That a medieval forger would be able to add such a detail is fairly astonishing. Of course, as with everything surrounding The Shroud, others (and Wilson, I presume) argue that there are no coin impressions in the eyes of the Shroud-figure. 6. Finally, if The Shroud is a forgery, those who painted the image on the glass had a remarkable and accurate knowledge of both the full details of Roman crucifixion and how the body would have responded to such crucifixion. Additionally, the anonymous forgers would have had to have a strong knowledge of anatomy and wound-effects, as the wounds on The Shroud figure are consistent with what modern medical technology would expect. Wilson contends that there were many medieval people with deep and accurate knowledge of anatomy, and the only reason we don't expect the forgers to have such knowledge is because we have a sort of bias against people from the past and assume they are unsophisticated and unintelligent. Such bias is certainly real, I will readily admit, though it does seem that medical history of the last 500 years demonstrates that medieval medicine and anatomy was indeed quite primitive. So - did Wilson definitively prove that medieval forgers could have produced The Shroud? Maybe, maybe not. Even Wilson admits, “I have not proved much. Or, I do not think that I have. Men and women who have believed in the Shroud will continue to believe. There is a fireman somewhere in Italy who risked his life to save the Shroud. I have a great deal of respect for that man. Perhaps I've given those who disbelieve more reason for noses lifted in the air, but I have not proved that the Shroud was faked. What I have done is crudely demonstrate that such an image could easily be produced in a matter of weeks by wicked men with no scruples, a little imagination, and a little more skill. The fact that it could have been faked does not mean that it was, though I believe it to have been. ”   I'll say this - Wilson's supposed forgers would have had to be: remarkably intelligent, gifted with art, well supplied with very rare (if existent) glass panes, and have an astonishing - for the time - knowledge of medicine, Roman history and human anatomy. Additionally, they would have had to be in possession of a cloth from Palestine, and possibly even pollen that had come from Palestine as well.  There have been other attempts to recreate the Shroud as well. In 2009 the University of Pavia organic chemistry professor and skeptic society member Luigi Garlaschelli produced a fairly convincing (at first glance) reproduction. He describes his attempt: "What you have now is a very fuzzy, dusty and weak image, Then for the sake of completeness I have added the bloodstains, the burns, the scorching because there was a fire in 1532." Garlaschelli says his work disproves the claims of the shroud's strongest supporters. "Basically the Shroud of Turin has some strange properties and characteristics that they say cannot be reproduced by human hands,"For example, the image is superficial and has no pigment, it looks so lifelike and so on, and therefore they say it cannot have been done by an artist." "The procedure is very simple. The artist took this sheet and put it over one of his assistants," "His good idea was to wrap the sheet over the person underneath because he didn't want to obtain an image that was too obviously a painting or a drawing, so with this procedure you get a strange image, Time did the rest,"  As you might imagine, there are several people who disagree that Garlaschelli has produced a convincing replica. Dr. Thibault Heimburger has written an extensive and scientific rebuttal of Garlaschelli's method, essentially arguing that it does not really duplicate all of the elements of the Shroud, but is only a superficial likeness. His paper, linked in the shownotes, concludes:  L.G. concluded: “We have also shown that pigments containing traces of acidic compounds can be artificially aged after the rubbing step (…) in such a way that, when the pigment is washed away, an image is obtained having the expected characteristics as the Shroud of Turin. In particular the image is pseudo negative, is fuzzy with half-tones, resides on the top-most fibers of the cloth, has some 3D embedded properties and does not fluoresce”. I think to the contrary that the image has none of these characteristics (except negativity and nonfluorescence). L.G. used a sophisticated method and a new interesting hypothesis, and he got the best Shroud-like image today. It is interesting to notice that even so, the properties of his image remain in fact very far from the fundamental properties of the Shroud image. 9 For the moment, the Shroud image remains unfakeable. Source: https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/thibault-lg.pdf Shroud blogger Stephen Jones has also debunked the replication of Garlaschelli: http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2018/08/my-critique-of-borrini-m-garlaschelli-l.html  3. The complex herringbone twill pattern of the Shroud was not possible in the first century.  Some Shroud skeptics have speculated that the particular pattern of sewing used on the Shroud is too complex and advanced have been created in the first century.  In the Summer of 2000, archaeologists James Tabor and Shimon Gibson stumbled upon a freshly robbed first century grave outside of Jerusalem. Amazingly, the grave still had bodies in it, and one of them was encased in a somewhat intact first century shroud - the first shroud of that era that has been recovered in or around Jerusalem. Tabor writes of this discovery in a way that is very dismissive of the Turin Shroud:  Although 1st century cloth has been found at Masada and in caves in the Judean Desert, nothing of this sort had ever been found in Jerusalem. Apparently that niche, sealed with a blocking stone, had a geological fissure that kept water from seeping in and rotting the material. The tomb had any number of interesting features. DNA studies were done on all the individuals represented in the tomb—the first time, so far as we know, that this had even been done in an ancient Jerusalem tomb of this period. Textile analysis was done on the cloth—it turned out to be a mixture of linen and wool, not woven together but layered with a separate head piece. It had a distinctive 1st century weave—in contrast to the Shroud of Turin.  News articles from major sites like BBC and CNN concluded that this was yet more evidence that the Shroud was a fake. From the CNN article:  “And in addition, the weave of the shroud raises fresh doubts about the Shroud of Turin, which many people believe was used to wrap the body of Jesus. According to researchers involved in the excavation and subsequent testing, the recently discovered shroud lends more credible evidence that the Shroud of Turin does not date to Roman times when Jesus died but from a later period.” SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/16/mideast.ancient.shroud/index.html However, it should be noted that none of the researchers actually engaged in much textile research, nor were they textile experts. They were simply taking the design and weave  of one 1st century burial cloth and concluding that all other 1st century burial cloths from that area would have a similar weave-pattern. That seems plausible at first, but it turns out that it is not true.  Hamburg textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg is a recognized art historian and expert on the restoration of ancient textiles. She was able to examine and work on restoration/repair of the Shroud in 2001/2002 and published a book on it. She concludes on chapter of that book by saying:  “The seam that connects the 8 cm wide strip to the larger segment is not a simple one. The type of seam construction chosen clearly displays the intention to make the seam disappear on the face of the cloth as much as possible. This is another reason to believe that the Shroud was planned and produced by professionals. The sewing has been done from the reverse of the fabric and the stitches have been executed with great care and are barely noticeable on the face of the Shroud. The seam appears flat on the face and raised like a roll on the reverse of the fabric . Examples of this same kind of seam are again to be found among the textile fragments of Masada, already mentioned above. To conclude this chapter it can be said that the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which speak against its origin as a high quality product of the textile workers of the first century A.D.” SOURCE: Sindon by Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, pages 59-60, December 2001. John Tyerer, a chartered textile technologist, “It would be reasonable to conclude the linen textiles with ‘Z' twist yarns and woven 3/1 reversing twill similar to the Turin Shroud could have been produced in the first century Syria or Palestine.” (Source: The Shroud and The Controversy by Gary Habermas and Kenneth E. Stevenson, pg. 69)  4. The Shroud was myth-busted by John Calvin, among many others, who show us that The Scripture demands TWO burial cloths (one for the head, one for the body) and not ONE.  The Sudarium of Oviedo, long believed to be the "napkin" that was wrapped around Our Lord's head after His crucifixion and death, has been shown to have 120 "points of coincidence" with the Shroud, including the same AB blood type. Researchers assert, "The only possible conclusion is that the Oviedo sudarium covered the same face as the Turin Shroud." John Calvin:  4 Arguments against The Shroud:  THERE ARE MULTIPLE ‘SHROUDS' THAT CLAIM TO BE GENUINE.   It is now time to treat of the “sudary,” about which relic they have displayed their folly even more than in the affair of the holy coat; for besides the sudary of Veronica, which is shown in the Church of St Peter at Rome, it is the boast of several towns that they each possess one, as for instance Carcassone, Nice, Aix-la-Chapelle, Tréves, Besançon, without reckoning the fragments to be seen in various places.Now, I ask whether those persons were not bereft of their senses who could take long pilgrimages, at much expense and fatigue, in order to see sheets, of the reality of which there were no reasons to believe, but many to doubt; for whoever admitted the reality of one of these sudaries shown in so many places, must have considered the rest as wicked impostures set up to deceive the public by the pretence that they were each the real sheet in which Christ's body had been wrapped.  Answer: That counterfeits exist does not at all prove that there is no genuine article. Rather, a counterfeit shroud (or three) can be a fairly convincing proof that - at least at one time - there was a significant genuine shroud. 2. THE BIBLE DOES NOT RECORD A CLOTH WITH AN IMPRESSION ON IT.  St John, in his Gospel, relates even how St Peter, having entered the sepulchre, saw the linen clothes lying on one side, and the napkin that was about his head on the other; but he does not say that there was a miraculous impression of our Lord's figure upon these clothes, and it is not to be imagined that he would have omitted to mention such a work of God if there had been any thing of this kind. Answer: John 21:25 25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which, if they were written one by one, I suppose not even the world itself could contain the books that would be written.  This is a clear argument from silence. That doesn't mean it carries now weight - it does indeed carry some weight...but not enough to actually disprove the veracity of the Shroud. It should be pointed out that the miracle of the Shroud IF it happened and IF it was noticed by the ladies or the disciples would NOT have been all that significant in comparison to the resurrection of Jesus or the appearance of angels at the tomb. One can quite easily answer this argument from silence with another plausible argument from silence, and it is one I've not heard before. Consider how short, relatively speaking, each of the Gospels are - the Longest is Luke, checking in at just under 20000 words. In total, all four Gospels are approximately 65,000 words - not very lengthy. This is about the size of a shortish paper-back novel.  Given the relative brevity of these accounts, I find it remarkable that ALL FOUR Gospels mention the grave clothes of Jesus. Why? It would seem there would be little reason to record any details about the grave clothes unless...possibly...something remarkable happened to them. Now - is that argument enough to convince a skeptic? Of course not - because it is a very, very weak argument! So is Calvin's argument here that the Gospels would have mentioned it if something miraculous happened with the grave-wrapping of Jesus.  3. THE CLOTHES WERE GUARDED AND LEFT IN THE GRAVE.  Another point to be observed is, that the evangelists do not mention that either of the disciples or the faithful women who came to the sepulchre had removed the clothes in question, but, on the contrary, their account seems to imply that they were left there. Now, the sepulchre was guarded by soldiers, and consequently the clothes were in their power. Is it possible that they would have permitted the disciples to take them away as relics, since these very men had been bribed by the Pharisees to perjure themselves by saying that the disciples had stolen the body of our Lord ?  This one is not terribly difficult to answer. None of the gospels record the detail of removing the clothing, which could be because they did indeed remove it, but did not notice an image imprinted on it. It is highly unlikely they would have left cloth behind in the grave for reasons both sentimental and practical. As well, it should be noted that the Gospels do not record the presence of a guard at the tomb AFTER the resurrection of Jesus.  4. THE SHROUD IS ONE CLOTH AND THE BIBLE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT TWO CLOTHS SERVED TO BURY JESUS. I shall conclude with a convincing proof of the audacity of the Papists. Wherever the holy sudary is exhibited, they show a large sheet with the full-length likeness of a human body on it. Now, St John's Gospel, chapter nine teenth, says that Christ was buried according to the manner of the Jews ; and what was their custom ? This may be known by their present custom on such occasions, as well as from their books, which describe the ancient ceremony of interment, which was to wrap the body in a sheet, to the shoulders, and to cover the head with a separate cloth. This is precisely how the evangelist described it, saying, that St Peter saw on one side the clothes with which the body had been wrapped, and on the other the napkin from about his head. In short, either St John is a liar, or all those who boast of possessing the holy sudary are convicted of falsehood and deceit. * * This is probably Calvin's most well known argument contra the Shroud and the one that I hear most well-educated Protestants make when I bring up the Shroud to them That the Bible suggests a plurality of gravecloths, but the Shroud is only one cloth. On the surface, this might seem like a pretty compelling claim against the Shroud, but it is not quite as open and shut as Calvin would have us believe.  The most relevant passage in the Bible to this discussion is John 20:  6 Then, following him, Simon Peter came also. He entered the tomb and saw the linen cloths lying there. 7 The wrapping that had been on His head was not lying with the linen cloths but was folded up in a separate place by itself. Pretty clear, right - according to John's Gospel, there were not ONE but TWO burial cloths that wrapped Jesus. One, mentioned in vs 6 (Greek: ὀθόνια (othonia)/PLURAL)  and the other in verse 7 - a cloth wrapped around Jesus' head. (Greek: σουδάριον Soudarion)  Here's the thing, though - Many Shroud researchers, including Kenneth Stevenson, Gary Habermas, Ian Wilson, Barrie Schwortz and others contend that the Shroud shows evidence that there was a head cloth wrapped around the Shroud figure's neck and head - most likely to hold the jaw in place.  It would appear that the Sudarion was not a very significant part of the grave cloths that wrapped Jesus, as Matthew, Mark and Luke do not mention it in particular. Consider:  Mark 15:46 46 After he bought some fine linen, he took Him down and wrapped Him in the linen. Then he placed Him in a tomb cut out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the entrance to the tomb. Luke 23:53 and 24:12  52 He approached Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. 53 Taking it down, he wrapped it in fine linen and placed it in a tomb cut into the rock, where no one had ever been placed...12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. When he stooped to look in, he saw only the linen cloths. So he went home, amazed at what had happened. And Matthew 27: 59 So Joseph took the body, wrapped it in clean, fine linen, 60 and placed it in his new tomb, which he had cut into the rock. He left after rolling a great stone against the entrance of the tomb. So, the three synoptic gospels - Matthew, Mark and Luke - don't mention the head-wrapping, or the sudarion, but John does. Could this indicate that the sudarion was a smaller garment - one that would not have left much of an imprint on the Shroud? Possibly. But, again, I emphasize - The Shroud seems to allow for the existence of a head-scarf type wrapping, as well as ones around the wrists and feet. Rather than the Biblical account disproving The Shroud, it actually seems to describe it quite well. 5. THE ABUNDANCE OF FAKE RELICS PUT FORWARD BY MEDIEVAL CATHOLICS PROVES THE SHROUD IS ALSO FAKE.  St Honoratus has a body at Arles, and another at the island of Lerins, near Antibes.St Giles has a body at Toulouse, and a second in a town bearing his name in Languedoc.I could quote an infinite number of similar cases. I think that the exhibitors of these relics should at least have made some arrangement amongst themselves the better to conceal their barefaced impostures. Something of this sort was managed between the canons of Trêves and those of Liége about St Lambert's head. They compounded, for a sum of money, not to show publicly the head in their possession, in order to avoid the natural surprise of the public at the same relic being seen in two different towns situated so near to each other. But, as I have already remarked at the commencement of this treatise, the inventors of these frauds never imagined anyone could be found bold enough to speak out and expose their deceptions. This is really more of a subset of argument #1, and it is a fairly strong argument. However, it must be said that not every statement made by a dishonest person is a lie, and it is perfectly possible that not every relic claimed by the medieval Catholic church was fake. Most likely were. Were they ALL fake?  I'm not convinced they were.  So - Hopefully you've enjoyed this little bit of busting myths.  You can probably tell that I want the Shroud to be the real thing. There's several reasons for this, but none of them are apologetics-related. In other words, I don't want the Shroud to be the real burial cloth of Jesus because I think that would help prove the Bible to be reliable, or Jesus to be the resurrected Son of God. No article could prove such a thing. I do, however, want the Shroud to be real and genuine in the same sort of way that I want there to be a real Loch Ness Monster, or an extant Holy Grail somewhere out there. The world is a more interesting place with a legit Nessie swimming around in the cold waters of Scotland, and it is a more interesting place with real, tangible artifacts from the time of Jesus. Does that bias me? Possibly it does, and I don't want to enter this discussion biased. It does make me consider the claims of debunkers with a greater skepticism, however, and that might not be a bad thing.  I love John Calvin and am quite persuaded by his soteriological leanings in the realm of theology. That said, I believe his debunking of The Shroud is somewhat ham-handed, especially his contention that it is easily proved false by John 20 argument that the Bible says there were two different kinds of grave-clothes. I believe that there were indeed two different kinds of graveclothes used on Jesus - the Bible is explicit about this - there was a linen cloth that the body of Jesus was wrapped in, and a head covering (of some sort) that went along with it. That said, the Shroud appears to show evidence of there being a head scarf or head wrapping of some sort, and even if it didn't, one could easily see how the Shroud figure could have been wrapped in more than one cloth. I have little patience for people who believe the extraordinary simply because somebody told them it was so - gullibility is delightful in children, but unbecoming and unsophisticated in adults. I also have little patience for those who claim to debunk complex objects and possibilities with overly-simplistic and reductionist arguments. It is definitely possible - even plausible - that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery, but the fact that John 20:7 mentions a sudarion that was on the head of Jesus does not necessarily debunk the authenticity of The Shroud in any sore of logical, philosophical or archaeological way.  Ok - that was a long episode. ONE more Shroud episode coming up - a summation of sorts. I hope to have 20-25 reasons to believe the Shroud could be authentic as well as a number of reasons to NOT believe in the authenticity of The Shroud. Thanks for being patient, and thanks for listening. Please leave a positive review if you are so inclined. 

Imaginez une école, une école qui afficherait, en grande lettres, sur sa façade, la phrase “Apprendre pour être libre”, une école qui repenserait entièrement l’organisation traditionnelle des cours pour leur donner plus de sens et transmettre aux élèves le désir d’apprendre, une école où les décisions seraient prises collégialement par les élèves et les profs, une école dont l’objectif serait d’inclure tout le monde, et plus particulièrement les élèves plus précaires. Pendant sept ans, Le projet de cette école a été rêvé, pensé, imaginé par un groupe de passionné de pédagogie, “Les Pédagonautes”. Avec la Commune de Saint-Gilles, ils ont fait de ce rêve une réalité. Le 1er septembre 2017, cette école a pris son envol sous le nom de “Lycée Intégral Roger Lallemand” La série documentaire « L’envol de l’école » donne à entendre le carnet de bord sonore de cette démarche à l'ambition folle, depuis l'année qui précède l'ouverture de l'école jusqu'à la fin de sa première année d'existence Avec les voix de : Alki Brindel, Ariane Riveros Frédéric Lesueur, Imran El Ouaffrasi, Jeanne Brochen, Tanguy Pinxteren et Thomas Zech Prise de son, écriture, voix, musiques, montage et réalisation : Guillaume Istace Mixage : Christophe Rault Voix du générique : Fanny Roy Prise de son additionnelle : Benjamin Dandoy et Benoit Luporsi Production : Axolotl Illustrations pour la pochette: Antoine Blanquart Avec le soutien du Fonds d'Aide à la Création Radiophonique de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, de l'atelier de création sonore et radiophonique, de la Sacd, de la Scam, de la Promotion des lettres et de la RTBF.

L'envol de l'école est le carnet de bord sonore d'une démarche à l'ambition folle : réinventer l'école. Imaginez une école qui afficherait en grande lettres sur sa façade la phrase “Apprendre pour être libre”; une école qui repenserait entièrement l'organisation traditionnelle des cours pour leur donner plus de sens et transmettre aux élèves le désir d'apprendre; une école où les décisions seraient prises collégialement par les élèves et les profs, une école dont l'objectif serait d'inclure tout le monde, et plus particulièrement les élèves plus précaires. Pendant sept ans, Le projet de cette école a été rêvé, pensé, imaginé par un groupe de passionnés de pédagogie, “les pédagonautes”. Avec la Commune de Saint-Gilles, ils ont fait de ce rêve une réalité. Le 1er septembre 2017, cette école a pris son envol sous le nom de “Lycée Intégral Roger Lallemand” Durant 6 épisodes de 25 minutes, le documentaire plonge l'auditeur dans le réel des profs et des élèves et s'attache, au travers de quelques personnages à raconter la confrontation de ce projet utopique à la réalité du terrain. Il rend compte de cette réalité dans sa complexité, loin des discours et des leçons de morale. Prise de son, écriture, voix, musiques, montage et réalisation : Guillaume Istace Mixage : Christophe Rault Voix du générique : Fanny Roy Prise de son additionnelle : Benjamin Dandoy et Benoit Luporsi Illustrations pour la pochette: Antoine Blanquart Production : Axolotl, avec le soutien du FACR de la Fédération Wallonie Bruxelles, de l'ACSR, de la SACD, de la SCAM, de la Promotion des lettres et de la RTBF.

In this episode, Dr. Leslie C. Griffin, William S. Boyd Professor of Law at the University of Nevada Las Vegas William S. Boyd School of Law, describes her path to law and, eventually, the legal academy. First, she explains her background in religious studies, and how her desire for social change spurred her interest in law school. Later she discusses how she built relationships with faculty across disciplines, and how she has honed her teaching style over the years in both undergraduate and legal education. Griffin is on Twitter at @LeslieCGriffin.This episode was hosted by David A. Simon, Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, and a Project Researcher at the Hanken School of Economics. Simon is on Twitter at @David_Simon and his scholarship is available on SSRN. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Jeffrey Bellin, University Professor for Teaching Excellence and Robert and Elizabeth Scott Research Professor of Law at William & Mary Law School, discusses his path into and through the legal academy. He begins by explaining how his career began, how practice informed his scholarship, and how his scholarship changed over time. Later he reflects on how scholarship evolves and what new law professors can do to improve their teaching skills. Bellin is on Twitter at @BellinJ.This episode was hosted by David A. Simon, a Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law and a Project Researcher at the Hanken School of Economics. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Orin Kerr, Professor of Law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, discusses his path into legal academia and offers advice for aspiring academics and junior scholars. Among other things, Kerr describes his early career and how his research has evolved over time. Kerr also offers advice on how to write and think effectively as a legal scholar, as well as some tips for teaching. Kerr is on Twitter at @OrinKerr.This episode was hosted by David A. Simon, Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, and a Project Researcher at the Hanken School of Economics. Simon's scholarship is available on SSRN and he is on Twitter at @david_simon. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this Episode, we talk with June Carbone, Robina Chair in Law, Science and Technology at the University of Minnesota Law School. Carbone first explains how she broke into the legal academy, and how the hiring process has changed over the past 25 years. She continues by discussing what makes a good law review article, and how to engage with empirical research as a young scholar. Carbone also discusses how to engage with other academics without overwhelming your professional bandwidth. Carbone is on Twitter at @carbonej.This episode was hosted by David A. Simon, Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, and a Project Researcher at the Hanken School of Economics. Simon's scholarship is available on SSRN. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Mark Lemley, William H. Neukom Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, and Partner at Durie Tangri, discusses his views on legal scholarship. Lemley begins by describing his own experience coming up into the legal academe, and how law practice and exposure to diverse ideas stimulate his scholarship on a broad range of subjects. He goes on to explain how junior scholars can write interesting scholarship, engage with senior scholars, and manage the academic (and practice) workload. Lemley is on Twitter at @marklemley.This episode was hosted by David A. Simon, Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, and a Project Researcher at the Hanken School of Economics. Simon's scholarship is available on SSRN. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Jesus at the Last Supper tells his disciples, “the Father will send [the Holy Spirit, who] will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” John 14. We have a great promise from Jesus that we are not just left up to our own human reason, but guided by the Holy Spirit. And if Jesus rose from the dead, then his promises are true. The best explanation is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraphs 888-892 4 ways of infallible teaching magisterium First, the most exciting EXTRODINARY (not in a good way) act of Infallible teaching magisterium proclamation from the pope to “by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals.” Ex Cathedra (from the chair of Peter).             Example: Pope Pius IX in 1854 proclaimed Ex Cathedra to define that “Mary was, from the first moment of her conception […] preserved immune from all stain of original sin” (Ineffabilis Deus) CCC 490-493 Second, Ecumenical Council. An act of Supreme Magisterium where the bishops acting together with the pope meet and decide on matters of faith and morals.             Example: Council of Nicaea, defining Jesus full humanity and divinity. CCC 464-469 Third, unanimous agreement of the bishops with the pope as the ordinary and universal magisterium.             Example: Before Pope John Paul the Great wrote Evangelium Vitae he surveyed all the bishops and found unanimous agreement that murder, willed abortion, and euthanasia were immoral. Fourth, Sensus Fidei. This is where the whole church preserves and maintain a teaching and believe. Laity and hierarchy. CCC 92-93 and also defined in Vatican II Lumen Gentium, 12 Example: Pope Pius IX references this sense (although not explicitly) often in his justification for declaring the Immaculate Conception in Ineffabilis Deus. 5/26/19

Notre Dame brinner, Ellen bearbetar sina känslor på sociala medier, Sofia cringear respektabelt. Att försonas till varje pris, till och med med det oförsonliga: Academic Rights Watch, toxic masculinity, Victor Hugo och heliga veckan.

Klassitsistlikke jõulumissasid plaadilt Brazilian Adventures (Hyperion Records 2015)* Brasiilia heliloojate klassitsistlikku kirikumuusikat esitab Birminghamis tegutsev vokaal-instrumentaalansambel Ex Cathedra, dirigent on Jeffrey Skidmore.

Klassitsistlikke jõulumissasid plaadilt Brazilian Adventures (Hyperion Records 2015)* Brasiilia heliloojate klassitsistlikku kirikumuusikat esitab Birminghamis tegutsev vokaal-instrumentaalansambel Ex Cathedra, dirigent on Jeffrey Skidmore.

Sven interviews Nick Pitingolo about their song: リービング // 漂流間にスターレスレルム [leaving // drifting through a starless realm] as we drink Stone Ripper IPA and sip some sour Destihl: Sychopathic. Are dreams reality? What is Nick's favorite thing? How does Sven say Fataligeist?  REFS: Video: Black Astra (Voidbringer): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gy4cr2aOzXILoose Cobra IMC PHOTO: Emily Sanchez SONG: リービング // 漂流間にスターレスレルム [leaving // drifting through a starless realm]ALBUM: Funeral Horizon (forthcoming) BANDS: 酸葬儀 acidfuneral, Øde Vinter, Ex Cathedra, Voidbringer, リービング l e a v i n g, Stolen Boats, Arboris, Exordium [exordium to extinction], Isle Nine Asylum, xBURZUMx, Fataligeist, Buried beneath a blue sky, Atomic gutfuck, Eviscerate the Messiah, Fallacy, Demote the Danger, A dead current, Not for the faint of heart, Stalk the day, Suspended by the throat, Bloodstone massacre, Mr. eggy Favorite Thing:  Stone "ripper" IPA

The Church has very strong stances that promote the flourishing of life.  Based on the 5th Commandment the Church then helps us to see what actions would go against God's law and design for humans to live.  

Sean Rafferty presents the In Tune Highlights, bringing you a top selection from the best musicians on the show this week. This week features early music ensemble Ex Cathedra, the ever jazzy Curtis Stigers paying his respects to Frank Sinatra and the jazz continues with the spectacular pairing of Dame Evelyn Glennie and the HLK Trio.

It's another installment of our "Loud Ska" series. We know, the name isn't all that great. But if you're a fan of ska-punk, skacore, or just a little bit of grit in your ska, you'll want to check this one out. Featuring music by The Siren Six!, Gelugugu, Jungleproof, The NoShows, Suburban Swamp Kids, YamalDivan, Fat Chance, Faintest Idea, The GLG Twenties, Lead Shot Hazard, and Ex-Cathedra!

Lucie Skeaping is joined by guests Delma Tomlin (Director of the National Centre for Early Music in York), Steven Devine (keyboard player and Professor at Trinity Laban College of Music in London), Greg Skidmore (academic and singer with ensembles such as The Sixteen, Ex Cathedra and Alamire) and Tabea Debus (recorder player, recently graduated from the Royal Academy of Music) to discuss how the early music scene is likely to develop and change in coming years in terms of performance practice, education and academic research.

Fine recordings of early music from Latin America with Ex Cathedra, Ensemble Elyma, the Boston Camerata, Canto, Florilegium, and Musica Temprana.

The title of this episode is Push-BackAs we move to wind up this season of CS, we've entered into the modern era in our review of Church history and the emergence of Theological Liberalism. Some historians regard the French Revolution as a turning point in the social development of Europe and Western Civilization. The Revolution was in many ways, a result of the Enlightenment, and a harbinger of things to come in the Modern and Post-Modern Eras.At the risk of being simplistic, for convenience sake, let's set the history of Western Civilization into these eras of Church History.First is the Roman Era, when Christianity was officially opposed and persecuted. That was followed by the Constantinian Era, when the Faith was at first tolerated, then institutionalized. With the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West, Europe entered the Middle Ages and the Church was led by Rome in the West, Constantinople in the East.The Middle Ages ended with the Renaissance which swiftly split into two streams, the Reformation and the Enlightenment. While many Europeans broke from the hegemony of the Roman Church to launch Protestant movements, others went further and broke from religious faith altogether in an exaltation of reason. They purposefully stepped away from spirituality toward hard-boiled materialism.This gave birth to the Modern Era, marked by an ongoing tension between Materialistic Rationalism and Philosophical Theism that birthed an entire rainbow of intellectual and faith options.Carrying on this over-simplified review from where our CS episodes have been, the Modern Era then turned into the Post-Modern Era with a full-flowering and widespread academic acceptance of the radical skepticism birthed during the Enlightenment. The promises of the perfection of the human race through technology promised in the Modern Era were shattered by two World Wars and repeated cases of genocide in the 20th and 21st Cs. Post-Moderns traded in the bright Modernist expectation of an emerging Golden Age for a dystopian vision of technology-run-amuck, controlled by madmen and tyrants. In a classic post-modern proverb, the author George Orwell said, “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”In our last episode, we embarked on a foray into the roots of Theological Liberalism. The themes of the new era were found in the motto of the French Revolution: “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.”Liberty was conceived as individual freedom in both the political and economic realms. Liberalism originally referred to this idea of personal liberty in regard to economics and politics. It's come to mean something very different. Libertarian connects better with the original idea of liberalism than the modern term “liberalism.”In the early 19th C, liberals promoted the political rights of the middle class. They advocated suffrage and middle-class influence through representative government. In economics, liberals agitated for a laissez faire marketplace where individual enterprise rather than class determined one's wealth.Equality, second term in the French Revolution's trio, stood for individual rights regardless of legacy. If liberty was a predominantly middle-class virtue, equality appealed to rural peasants, the urban working class, and the universally disenfranchised. While the middle class and hold-over nobility advocated a laissez-faire economy, the working class began to agitate for equality through a rival philosophy called socialism. Workers inveighed for equality either through the long route of evolution within a democratic system or the shorter path of revolution via Marxism.Fraternity, the third idea in the trinity, was the Enlightenment reaction against all the war and turmoil that marked European history till then; especially the trauma that had rocked the continent through endless political, economic, and religious struggle. Fraternity represented a sense of brotherhood that rolled across Europe in the 19th C. And while it held the promise of uniting people in the concept of the universal brotherhood of man under the universal Fatherhood of God, it quickly devolved into Nationalism that would only lead to even bloodier conflicts since they were now accompanied by modern weapons.These social currents swirled around the Christian Faith during the first decades of the Age of Progress, but no one predicted the ruination they'd bring the Church of Rome, steeped as it was in an inviolable tradition. For over a thousand years she'd presided over feudal Europe. She enthroned dozens of monarchs and ensconced countless nobles. And like them, the Church gave little thought to the power of peasants and the growing middle class. In regards to social standing, in 18th C European society, noble birth and holy calling were everything. Intelligence or achievement meant little.Things began to heat up in Europe when Enlightenment thinkers began to question the old order. In the 1760s, several places around the world began to feel the heat of political unrest. There'd always been Radicals who challenged the status quo. It usually ended badly for them; forced to drink hemlock or such. But in the mid and late 18th C, they became popular advocates for the middle-class and poor. Their demands were similar: The right to participate in politics, the right to vote, the right to greater freedom of expression.The success of the American Revolution inspired European radicals. They regarded Americans as true heirs of Enlightenment ideals. They were passionate about equality; and desired peace, yet ready to fight for freedom. In gaining independence from the world's most formidable power, Americans proved Enlightenment ideals worked.Then, in the last decade of the 18th C, France executed its king, became a republic, formed a revolutionary regime, and crawled through a period of brutality into the Imperialism of Napoleon Bonaparte.As we saw in an earlier episode, the Roman Catholic church was so much a part of the old order that revolutionaries often made it an object of their wrath. In the early 1790s, the French National Assembly sought to reform the Church along rationalist lines. But when it eliminated the Pope's control and required an oath of loyalty on the clergy, it split the Church. The two camps faced off against each other in every village. Between thirty and 40,000 priests were forced into hiding or exile. Atheists recognized the cultural wind was now at their back and pressed for more. Why stop at reforming the Church when you could pry its grip from all society? Radicals moved to remove all traces of Christianity's influence. They adopted a new calendar and elevated the cult of “Reason.” Some churches were converted to “Temples of Reason.”But by 1794 this farce had spent itself. The following year a statute was passed affirming the free exercise of religion, and loyal Catholics who'd kept a low profile during the Revolution returned. But Rome never forgot. For now, Liberty meant the worship of the goddess of Reason.When Napoleon took control, he struck an agreement with the pope; the Concordat of 1801. It restored Roman Catholicism as the quasi-official religion of France. But the Church had lost much of its prestige and power. Europe would never again be a society held together by an alliance of altar and throne. On the other side of things, Rome never welcomed the liberalism reshaping much of Europe's courts.As Bruce Shelley aptly remarks, Jesus and the apostles spent little time talking about political freedom, personal liberty, or a person's right to their opinions. Valuable and important as those things are, they simply do not come into view as values in the appeal of the Gospel. The freedom Christ offers comes through salvation, which places a necessary safeguard on liberty to keep it from becoming a dangerous license.But during the 19th C, it became popular to think of liberty ITSELF as being free! Free of any and all restraint. Any restriction on freedom was met with a knee-jerk opposition. Everyone ought to be as free as possible. The question then became; just what does that mean. How far does “possible” go?John Stuart Mill suggested this guideline, “The liberty of each, limited by the like liberty of all.” Liberty meant the right to your opinions, the freedom to express and act upon them, but not to the degree that in doing so, you impinge others' ability to do so with theirs. Politically and civilly, this was best made possible by a constitutional government that guaranteed universal civil liberty, including the freedom to worship according to one's choice.Popes didn't like that.In the political and economic vacuum that followed Napoleon, several monarchs tried to re-establish the old systems of Europe. They were resisted by a new and empowered wave of liberals. The first of these liberal uprisings were quickly suppressed in Spain and Italy. But the liberals kept at it and in 1848, revolution temporarily triumphed in most European capitals.Popes Leo XII, Pius VIII, and Gregory XVI by all accounts were good men. But they ignored the emerging modernity of 19th century Europe by clinging to a moribund past.There are those who would say it's not the duty of the Church to keep pace with changing times. The truths of God don't change. So on the contrary, the Church is to remain resolute in holding to The Faith once and for all delivered to the saints. Faithfulness to the essentials of the Christian Faith is not what we're referring to here. You can change the flooring in your house without agreeing with the world. Some Popes of the late 18th to mid 19th century seemed to kind of pull the blinds of Vatican windows, trying to keep out the philosophical ideas then sweeping the Continent. That posture toward the wider culture tended to only further alienate the intellectual community.This early form of Liberalism wanted to address historic evils that have plagued humanity. But it refused to allow the Catholic Church a role in that work as it related to morality and public life. Liberals said politics ought to be independent of Christian ethics. Catholics had rights as private citizens, but their Faith wasn't welcome in the public arena. This is part of the creeping secularism we talked about in the last episode.One of the lingering symbols of papal ties to the Medieval world was the Papal States where the Pope was both spiritual leader and civil ruler. In the mid-19th C, a movement for Italian unity began that aimed to turn the entire peninsula into a single nation. Such a revolution wouldn't tolerate the Papal States. Liberals welcomed Pope Pius IX, who seemed a reforming Pope who'd listen to their counsel. In 1848, he installed a new constitution for the Papal States granting moderate participation in government. This movement toward liberal ideals moved some to suggest the Pope as leader over a unified Italy. But when Pius' appointed Prime Minister of the Papal States was assassinated by revolutionaries, Pius rescinded the new constitution. Instead of putting the revolution down, it broke out in Rome itself and Pius had to flee. With French assistance, he returned and returned the Papal states to an absolutist regime. Opposition grew under the leadership of King Victor Emmanuel II of Sardinia. In 1859 and 60 large sections of the Papal States were carved away by nationalists. Then in March of 1861, Victor Emmanuel was proclaimed King of Italy in Florence.But the City of Rome was protected by a French garrison. When the Franco-Prussian War forced the withdrawal of French troops, Italian nationalists invaded. After a short engagement in September of 1870, Rome surrendered. After lasting for a millennium, the Papal States were no more.Pius IX holed up in the Vatican. Then in June 1871, King Victor Emmanuel transferred his residence to Rome, ignoring the protests and threatened ex-communication by the pope. The new government offered Pius an annual salary together with the free and unhindered exercise of his religious roles. But the Pope rejected the offer and continued his protests. He forbade Italy's Catholics to participate in political affairs. That just left the field open to more radicals. The result was a growing anticlerical course in Italian civil affairs. This condition became known as the “Roman Question.” It had no resolution until Benito Mussolini concluded the Lateran Treaty in February 1929. The treaty stipulated that the pope must renounce all claims to the Papal States, but received full sovereignty in the tiny Vatican State. This condition exists to this day.1870 not only marks the end of the rule of the pope of civil affairs in Italy, it also saw the declaration of his supreme authority as the Bishop of Rome in a doctrine called “Papal Infallibility.” The First Vatican Council, which hammered out the doctrine, represented the culmination of a movement called “ultramontanism” meaning “across the mountains.” Originally referring to the Pope's hegemony beyond the Alps into the rest of Europe, the term eventually came to mean over and beyond any mountain. Ultramontanism formalized the Pope's right to lead the Church.It came about thus . . .Following the French Revolution (and here we are yet again, recognizing the importance of that revolution in European and world affairs) an especially strong sense of loyalty to the Pope developed there. After the nightmare of the guillotine and the cultural trauma of Napoleon's reign, many Catholics came to regard the papacy as the only source of civil order and public morality. They believed only popes were capable of restoring sanity to society. Only the papacy had the power to guide the clergy to protect religion from political coercion.Infallibility was suggested as a necessary prerequisite for an effective papacy. The Church had to become a monarchy adjudicating God's will. Shelley says as sovereignty was to secular kings, infallibility would be to popes.By the mid-19th C, this thinking attracted many Catholics. Popes encouraged it in every possible way. One publication said when the pope meditated, God was thinking in him. Hymns appeared that were addressed, not to God, but to Pius IX.  Some even spoke of the Pope as the vice-God of humanity.In December 1854, Pius IX declared as dogma The Immaculate Conception; a belief that had been traditional but not official; that Mary was conceived without original sin. The subject of the decision was nothing new. What was, however, was the way it was announced. This wasn't dogma defined by a creed produced by a council.  It was an ex-cathedra proclamation by the Pope. Ex Cathedra means “from the chair,” and defines an official doctrine issued by the teaching magisterium of the Holy Church.Ten years after unilaterally announcing the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, Pius sent out an encyclical to all bishops of the Church. He attached a Syllabus of Errors, a compilation of eighty evils then in place in society. He declared war on socialism, rationalism, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, public schools, Bible societies, separation of church and state, and a host of other so-called errors of the Modern Era. He ended by denying that “the Roman pontiff ought to reach an agreement with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization.”It was a hunker down and rally round an infallible pope mentality that aimed to enter a kind of spiritual hibernation, only emerging when Modernity had impaled itself on its own deadly horns and bled to death.Pius saw the need for a new universal council to address the Church's posture toward Modernity and its philosophical partner, Liberalism. He began planning for it in 1865 and called the First Vatican Council to convene at the end of 1869.The question of the definition of papal infallibility was all the buzz. Catholics had little doubt that as the successor of Peter the Pope possessed special authority. The only question was how far that authority went. Could it be exercised independently from councils or the college of bishops?After some discussion and politicking, 55 bishops who couldn't agree to the doctrine as stated were given permission by the Pope to leave Rome, so as not to create dissension. The final vote was 533 for the doctrine of infallibility. Only 2 voted against it. The Council asserted 2 fundamentals: 1) The primacy of the pope and 2) His infallibility.First, as the successor of Peter, vicar of Christ, and supreme head of the Church, the pope exercises full authority over the whole Church and over individual bishops. That authority extends to all matters of faith and morals as well as to discipline and church administration. Consequently, bishops owe the pope obedience.Second, when the pope in his official capacity, that is ex cathedra, makes a final decision concerning the entire Church in a matter of faith and morals, that decision is infallible and immutable and does not require the consent of a Council.The strategy of the ultramontanists, led by Pius IX, shaped the lives of Roman Catholics for generations. Surrounded by the hostile forces of modernity; liberalism and socialism, Rome withdrew behind the walls of an infallible papacy.