Thursday, July 26, 2007

The Shroud of Turin vs. the Shroud of Jacques de Molay?

As a Templar Knight I would like to believe that Jacques de Molay was divinely guided and would deserve such and honor as having his face outlined in a cloth but I cannot and neither should you…

Jacques de Molay was a leader of men but he was not a God as many have and still are trying to make him out to be. De Molay made mistakes and he paid for those mistakes like any other man.

Jacques de Molay and Geoffrey de Charney the Preceptor of Normandy were burned at the stake on a small island called Isle de la Cite in the middle of the Seine River in Paris, France. Their ashes and any pieces of bone that may have remained were collected and dumped into the river so that people (Templar’s) would not be able to collect them and venerate the remains. This occurred on March 18th, 1314.

So, during the 7 years that he was a prisoner and being tortured, where did the idea come from that the shroud could have been de Molay’s image?

Interesting note: The Sinclair’s of Scotland, who try to include themselves in everything Templar and Templar related, say “the shroud of Turin is in fact not the imprint of Christ but the imprint of Jacques De Molay, the last grandmaster of the Knights Templar. It was put on display 50 years after his death by the family of Jeffrey De Charney. The wounds suffered by De Molay are the same as those suffered by Christ”. (By unknown Sinclair, 7 Sept. 1999)

In 1389 the Shroud was reportedly in the hands of the “Church” in Troyes. Troyes and the Cistercian order, although there is no recode saying that they had passion of the Shroud, the possibility exists, along with the Priory of Sion and the Templar Knight’s if as expressed existed are secret.

In 1418 the shroud was put under the protection of Humbert and kept at the castle of Montfort near Montbard, more Templar mystery.

Others believe that it was Da Vinci that “painted” the shroud and used his own face as a model, this is all bunk. For one thing there was a pre-existing long history of the shroud and considering that da Vinci was not born until 1452 and died in 1519 how could he have done it? Also there is no scientist or artist that has been able to copy the exact method used to make the shroud and that is with all the technology available in 2007, so how did a man who lived 500 years ago do it?

The Shroud of Turin is a mystery to many and proof of Christ’s existence to others, including me.

Supposed scientist have tried to carbon date the shroud from pieces that were used to repair the burns in the shroud, these pieces of cloth dated were from the medieval times (1350AD) and would show this in the dating technique used and since they were applied long after to shroud was made the dating cannot be accepted by anyone without a set agenda of disinformation spreading.

There are many people who do not want the Shroud to be proven to be the burial cloth of Christ and to some extant this included the Roman Catholic Church. I believe that if there was no risk in proving the Shroud as Christ’s cloth the Church would openly declare it as such, but I feel they are afraid to take the chance for fear of loosing followers. This in my opinion is wrong, the Church is founded on belief with little supporting fact so why are they afraid to support this as a belief?

These people have even gone in their desperate attempt to discredit the Shroud to say that it was Caiaphas’ burial cloth and the image appeared naturally through chemical reactions caused by soap and starch in the fabric. They even go so far as to say the “blood” is nothing more than soapy residue, belying the fact that as of 2005 DNA testing analysis has proven it to be blood.

It is easy to see why the others do not want this to be proven to be Christ’s burial cloth, it would tear their nice do whatever you want world into pieces, they would have to accept Christ as an actual person and what with the cloth being unstoppable proof also his divinity. Now they would be accountable for their actions, not only to society but to a God they cannot see.

The Shroud in the first century was known as the Mandylion and that Jude Thaddeus had brought it to Edessa. In the early fourth century we learn from Eusebuis that King Abgar requested that Jesus come to Edessa and that Thomas the Apostle does send Jude there with the Shroud.

In 944 AD, the “Image of Edessa” is transferred to Constantinople by the Byzantine emperor Romanus I and there it remained until 1204 when it is taken by the 4th Crusaders the Knight Templar’s. (Once again a Templar connection).

To support this theory, author Ian Wilson who wrote the book "The Shroud of Turin: Burial Cloth of Jesus?" makes the claim that the head that the Templars were accused of worshipping was none other than that of Jesus. His belief is that the Shroud when folded depicted the head of Christ and was referred to as the "Mandylion.

“There is a painted panel at Templecombe in England that shows a bearded head like that, which is depicted on the Mandylion. (

With this history why does anyone deny the Shroud as the true burial cloth of Christ and do so by saying that it was created in the medieval ages when we can see it was not?

So how are the Knight’s Templar connected to the Shroud? Historian Dan Scavone has proposed that the shroud was taken to Besançon, France, early after its disappearance from Constantinople. There is some evidence that it was acquired by Geoffrey de Charny before 1349 when he wrote to Pope Clement VI stating his intention to build a church at Lirey. But this information has to be wrong as Charny was burned to death along with de Molay in 1314. A second de Charny?

In 1307, leaders of the Templars were executed, including Jacques de Molay, the last Grand Master of the Order of the Knights Templar. One of the executed leaders was a knight called Geoffrey de Charny, possibly a relative of the Geoffrey de Charny who displayed the shroud in Lirey about 50 years later. More likely by the family of Geoffrey de Charney in his name.

During the famous and terrible trial of Philippe Le Bel against the Temple Order, several Templars confessed they adored a mysterious and bearded « head » during their secret ceremony of initiation. This fact is written in the minutes of this trial stored in the Secret Records of the Vatican and analyzed in the French book l'Assassinat programmé des Templiers written by Jacques Rolland and published in 2000 by Editions de La Table d'Emeraude ».

This mysterious head venerated by the Templars is probably the Mandylion. During its secret journey with the Templars, the Mandylion was folded 8 times over and only the head was displayed. In fact, the unfolded Mandylion is a very large piece of linen measuring roughly 14’ x 3 ½’ revealing the inexplicable frontal and dorsal imprints of the body of a man.

About a year after Constantinople was plundered, Theodore Ducas Anglelos wrote in a letter to Pope Innocent III:

The Venetians partitioned the treasure of gold, silver and ivory, while the French did the same with the relics of saints and the most sacred of all, the linen in which our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped after His death and before the Resurrection. We know that the sacred objects are preserved by their predators in Venice and France and in other places, the sacred linen in Athens.

In 1207, Nicholas d'Orrante, Abbott of Casole and the Papal Legate in Athens, wrote about relics taken from Constantinople by French knights. Referring specifically to burial cloths, he mentions seeing them "with our own eyes" in Athens.

There is some indication that the Shroud may have passed into the hands of an order of warrior monks known as the Knights Templar. This order was founded in the early 12th century among Crusaders in the Holy Land.

Both quotes from:

In summation we can now clearly see that the Shroud dates back to biblical times, but if it is truly the Shroud of our Lord Jesus, the only real proof is in your own personal beliefs, for me it is Christ’s burial cloth, of that I have no doubt.

I also hope to have shown you that the Shroud was in the possession of the Templar Knight’s dating from 1204 AD and that this relic was the probable cause of the charges levied by Philippe the Fair of Idol worshiping that the Templar’s were charged with.

I also hope to have proven to you that it could not have been the burial cloth of Jacques de Molay seeing as he was burned at the stake and his few remains where thrown into the Sine river to prevent his veneration.

Believe what you will, but the facts should lead you to the correct answer, it may not be what you want it to be but then facts are facts until disproved, right?


chaindropz said...

The history is very interesting. I put little faith in the shroud. I do not disagree with you. I put all my faith in Christ. In rising from the dead he ruled over death. Rising to the heavens he ruled over gravity. We know very little when you consider we don't know what causes gravity. Mass attracts Mass explains very little. Lowlander

Anonymous said...

Very interesting and enlightening. What you can find now is wonderful. Thank you for your informaion. I know you went ot great lenghts to publish it. Again I thank you. Be it the shroud of Christ or not, it is something to be venerated.

makemyday said...

[quote]But this information has to be wrong as Charny was burned to death along with de Molay in 1314. A second de Charny?[unquote]

Indeed! His nephew if I am not mistaken.

scotcelt said...

I believe it's genuine, I found new templar insight here:

Anonymous said...

Here is a reprint of your first two paragraphs, replacing each instance of De Molay with Jesus Christ.

'As a Templar Knight I would like to believe that Jesus Christ was divinely guided and would deserve such an honor as having his face outlined in a cloth but I cannot and neither should you…

Jesus Christ was a leader of men but he was not a God as many have and still are trying to make him out to be. Jesus Christ made mistakes and he paid for those mistakes like any other man.'

And now you see why this argument against the De Molay theory is very weak. It applies equally to Christ, unless you have a 'set agenda of disinformation spreading' like you accuse others of having.

As in, you already have the belief that Jesus is God and no evidence could be accepted to suggest otherwise (and that evidence exists, even within the severely abridged and edited English translations of the Bible that you have likely read.)

In fact, according to historical accounts which you probably ignore completely, but which are abundant, Knights Templar often went so far as to proclaim that Jesus was a Jewish revolutionary, but not the single begotten son of God. Jaques De Molay was made to confess to such initiation rituals where Jesus was accepted to be a regular man and the cross was trampled on.

I think you are a believer that Christ is God in human form, and that the Shroud is of His divine image. This stands in stark contrast with your claim that you are a Templar Knight (which you are not unless you have been granted such by a Grand Master or a Pope, which I very much doubt. You may share a bloodline, but that does not make you a Templar Knight any more than sharing a bloodline with an Olympic gold-medalist makes you an Olympian)

However, let me finish by sating, to each his own. Let us not let our difference in belief lead to further disgusting acts of hatred and violence. You believe what you like, and I will do the same. Thank you for an interesting post. May peace be with you.

michael jude said...

I have a comment or two posted on the Shroud of Turin Blog that might interest you

Michael Jude, author
Thirteenth Apostle: The Coming Transubstantiation