The most significant relic of the Christian faith, or a masterfully created fraud? The famous 1988 Carbon-14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was meant to reveal the truth behind the Shroud of Turin.

However as with any meeting of science and faith, more questions persist then can be answered. The shroud, after already being scrutinised during five says of testing by scientists in 1978, was meant to be dated precisely using radiocarbon techniques.

And when the results were published in 1989 the verdict was simple: the cloth was fraudulent. The earliest possible date the fabric could have been created was 1260 AD.

This could not have been the cloth which wrapped the Christ in death. And the faint and yellowed image of a tortured man? This could not be the face of the Messiah. However in the years since the Carbon 14 dating, doubts have been raised. Some claim that the area tested was a portion of the shroud patched by nuns in the middle ages.

Others claim that the samples were tainted by centuries of fingers handling the cloth. Irrespective of these claims? validity, modern man?s faith in the certainty of science has been tested by its own inconsistency in determining the origin of this simple cloth.

It was these matters which were addressed at St. Patrick?s Catholic Church on Tuesday night, when a small gathering of believers and sceptics were treated to a lecture from Prof. Remi Duburque.

Prof. Duburque remains steadfast that the cloth which Joseph of Arimathea used to wrap the body of Jesus Christ is the same 14-foot-by-three-foot cloth which was held for decades in the Italian town of Turin.

And the tortured man whose haunting face and bloodied body are imprinted on the cloth? This, he claims, is the likeness of Christ as he appeared in death.

?My interest is to spread the word of this miraculous artefact, which based on my many readings, I believe to be the authentic Shroud of the Gospels,? Prof. Duburque said of his own position. ?The facts in favour of authenticity are so overwhelming that any truth-seeker has to be attracted to belief.

?If this is not Jesus Christ, it is another man with the same name who died on the same day,? said Prof. Duburque, who taught English Literature at Loyola University for several decades and is now at Naugatuck Valley College in Connecticut.

The Shroud, he said, is a fascinating landscape for the application of every area of science. Yet if there is anything to be gained from the relentless scrutiny of the cloth, it is that perhaps our modern ?faith? in certainty of science rests on grounds that are still a little shaky.

Prof. Duburque traced the history of the Shroud for the group, from its recording in all four gospels to its latest scientific testing. The challenge for believers however is the major gap in the Church?s records which lose track of the shroud until 1349 when it was deposited in a French church by a nobleman returning from Constantinople (now Istanbul).

It wasn?t until the late 19th century and the dawning of photography that veneration for the Shroud grew. Our most distinct images of the face on the Shroud are produced from film negatives. Prof. Duburque spoke primarily on the findings of the team of scientists who tested the shroud in 1978. ?There was no way that an artist could have produced this image,? Prof. Duburque said, summing up the findings of the team.

Thousands of photos were taken and the Shroud?s surface was endlessly sampled. Scientists were able to take a portion of the blood from one of the stains on the dorsal image on the cloth.

The image on the Shroud revealed too many anatomically perfect details to have been created by an artist?s hand, including the shortening of one leg which can only be attributed to the crossing of the feet during a crucifixion.

Interestingly, Prof. Duburque said, the crown of thorns which are ?Christ?s signature? on the Shroud, was actually revealed to be a cap of thorns.

However the 1978 findings were debunked when the 1988 Carbon dating proved that the linen fabric was created during the Middle Ages. These results were thought to be indisputable.

But Prof. Dubuque was quick to point out that such tests ?are tricky? and that faulty results were possible. For example, he said, dating of linen has proven to be almost impossible, citing an example of an Egyptian mummy which was dated with certainty to 1000 BC, but its linen wrappings were carbon-14 dated to1000 AD.

However, as several of the lecture?s attendees commented, even if scientific verified with precision that the Shroud originated from Galilee in the 1st century AD, there can be no certainty that this is the face of Christ. ?This is where faith comes in,? one man said, and each person must make that lead on their own.

@EDITRULE:

Prof. Duburque recommended several books on the Shroud of Turin:

Ian Wilson?s ?The Turin Shroud?, Penguin Books, England 1979

Ian Wilson and Barrie Schwortz?s ?The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence?, Michael O?Mara Books Ltd. London 2000

Dr. John H. Heller?s ?Report on the Shroud of Turin?, Houghton Mifflin Co., New York, 1983

www.Shroud.com.