It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Historical records seem to indicate that a shroud bearing an image of a crucified man existed in the small town of Lirey around the years 1353 to 1357 in the possession of a French Knight, Geoffroi de Charny, who died at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356. However the correspondence of this shroud in Lirey with the shroud in Turin, and its very origin has been debated by scholars and lay authors, with statements of forgery attributed to artists born a century apart. Some contend that the Lirey shroud was the work of a confessed forger and murderer.
It is often mentioned that the first certain historical record dates from 1353 or 1357. However the presence of the Turin Shroud in Lirey, France, is only undoubtedly attested in 1390 when Bishop Pierre d'Arcis wrote a memorandum to Antipope Clement VII, stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed.
Antipope Clement VII refrained from expressing his opinion on the shroud; however, subsequent popes from Julius II on took its authenticity for granted.
Thus, we find it hard to imagine circumstances in which a TEA
employee’s inability to publicly speak out for or against a potential subject for
the Texas curriculum would be construed or perceived as the State’s
endorsement of a particular religion. Comer has presented no evidence that
disputes the district court’s conclusion in this regard, and accordingly, we find
“no realistic danger . . . that the community would think that [TEA’s
neutrality policy] . . . s endorsing religion or any particular creed.” Freiler,
185 F.3d at 346. We find that TEA’s neutrality policy does not violate
Lemon’s second prong.
For the aforementioned reasons, we conclude that TEA’s neutrality
policy does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Accordingly, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Where you aware the bishop that found the shroud said it was a fake and goes on to mention 28 others in various churches.And microscopic analysis revealed the image is indeed paint Which was applied the image would have been much brighter but most of the paint came off leaving the discoloration behind. Add to that the image itself think it's got blood running down his face. Now here's the problem with a burial the jews would wash and then pit oils on the body before burial. Number two supposed they didn't for some odd reason clean the body the blood would have been matted in his hair not running down his face. Then blood on the shroud appears red but problem is blood turns black quickly on a cloth try it. Than they tested it "The 'blood' has been definitively proved to be composed of red ocher and vermilion tempera paint."