1980/2010 Giovanni Imbalzano Lulu © The magic history of the Holy Shroud
From the first of centuries!
1° MILLENIUM: Constantine VII, Omar I, Baradeus, Bar Daisan, Mar Aggai, Abgar V... AND:
ETHALAH
In what follows, it should be observed that latter theologians are more beside the Trinitarian conception of PALUT, and the other to that opposed of Mar-Mari.
[201] The Abgar legend was an useful reinforcement for the reconversion of the Believers of Orient, for us a call to the authentic worthiness of the Shroud [525]
"Repetita Iuvant"
The Patriarch Addaj ("namesake" and disciple of St. Thaddeus of Edessa) had gone in the East as Thaddeus and (~ 100 AC) Aggai the successor continued with the same mission. Meanwhile in Edessa with the support of Antioch (~ 120) the first church was built, although unfortunately this church will operate few years: the Shroud was still in possession of Aggai, in an Eastern catacomb. He brought back the Shroud at PALUT, that the same Aggai indicated or anticipated as a future patriarch, residing in Antioch ~ until the year 190. What happened to the Shroud later? Egeria describes the sanctuaries of Edessa in the year 384 and the existence of the Mandilion that Eulogius the Patriarch had praised as a talisman, without indicate where this was: therefore the Shroud was no longer in Edessa, although after the first flood of the river Daisan (201) was rebuilded the city. But in 303 there was a second inundation, and the reconstruction was finished only to the year 313 with the Great Church of St. Sofia, under the Patriarchs Sha'ad and Conon. Ethalah their successor (324) completed the work with a cemetery at east of the church. In Georgia there is a document of the 325, the same date of completion of the church (at the source Cellirhoe, or Khabur). In this, Niaforis the monk note that the Shroud was in the hands of S. Peter until that he was in Jerusalem, and later the hiding place was hidden. Before going to Rome, he entrusted it to another Apostle, and was exactly Thaddeus, which at that time was the Apostle more near to Jerusalem. I note that Georgia region is beside the boundaries of our route of the Holy Shroud, between the monastery Agaçalti and Nisibis, center of the Christian school of Edessa; in Komani there was the tomb of Simon the Zealot, evangelist of Georgia together with Andrew and Matthew, while Thomas the Apostle were in Mesopotamia with Thaddeus (then Addaj).
We returning to Ethalah, this is the unique Patriarch of which is specified end of his office (346) but not date of death. It is known that actively participated at the First Council of Nicaea (325) against the Arians, but later (361) they have forced to the resignations Abraham's successor, supported by Constantius II, from 340 undisputed emperor: the same has appointed in place of Abraham Barses, remitting this from Haran to Edessa. Constantius dies just in the 361, and the successor Julian the Apostate persecutes the Christians, to do so hated by the same Shapur II, worshipper of Magus's and until then violent persecutor of other religions. In 362 he same has invaded "peacefully" the Nisibis city, home of Edessa Christian School, and in the year 364 he has conquered the Armenia. The Armenia remained a "free zone" for the Christians, especially after the agreement of the 387 between Theodosius (I) and the Parties. In following, we consider that it was the first officially Christian State in the world, in 301, by means of St. Gregory the Illuminator, Katholikos Echmiadzin and devotee of St. Jude Thaddeus. He will know of the Patriarch Ethalaha of Edessa at the Council of Nicaea in 325; in the same year, the Bishop Gregory will leave the Diocese to his eldest son and he retired in a convent in Daranali, until his death.
"An Exodus toward EST"
In the 345 zealots Canaanites or "knanaya" including Thomas the Zealot of Edessa (in a trade with the India) has complained the persecution of the Arians to Ethalah. He decided to leave her center of Patriarch and he led them in Mesopotamia, from Barba'shmin, bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon (343-346) and his first master (with monk rigid customs and against the Arian). Because Thomas Canaanite have had a very good experience of Indian lands, evangelized by St. Thomas, Barba'shmin sent them there with the Bishop Joseph of Uruk (new persecutions were preparing also in Babylonia). With seventy-two Jewish-Christian families then they was disembarked in Cranganore (now Kodungallur, in Kerala) and from here at Mylapore, near Chennai of Madras, where they found the relics of St. Thomas; the relics were then moved to Edessa (perhaps with the exodus from Nisibis of the 363, with St. Ephrem). It's remembered that a certain John of Edessa, participant in the Synod of 325 as Ethalah, in 354 was consecrated as third Bishop of India, always under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Antioch, the domain of the Arians.
It is recalled that a certain John of Edessa, as Ethalah participant in the Synod of 325, in 354 was consecrated Bishop of India 3 rd, always under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Antioch, the domain of the Arians. In India in fact, the official version of the Orthodox Church of Kerala says that the shipment was arranged by their Aryan Patriarch of Antioch, supported by Constantius II, head of discord, but this is not surprising, because three cargos departed from the Persian Gulf, with the three banners of Rome, Edessa and Babylon. Historically, this was to be an Exodus turbulent, also participants some Orthodox Jews, and while the Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon found the martyrdom in 346 by the hand of the Chaldeans of King Shapur II, Ethalah in possession of the Shroud escaped in some mountain retreat of the monks still "orthodox" (see below) protected by Armenian Catholicos, not too much beyond the Roman limits. Here it is important to observe that Ethalah was certainly in touch with the Armenian-Georgian church, which will vindicate the recovery... or better the transfer of the Holy Shroud, finally to Edessa!
See Syriac Chronology;
Knanaya origin;
Chiesa Malankarese Giacobita;
Crawford, Burkitt Early eastern Christianity, St. Margaret's lectures 1904 on the Syriac-speaking church;
Chronicles of Edessa (made little before the nomination of Baradeus 541)
of Addi, Patriarch which defined the flood of 201 as "the most big disaster for
the Church of Edessa".
"Conservative Monks"
In its Reports, Egeria remembers that has see the "Letter of Jesus to Abgar", what was defended against attacks of the Persians to Edessa in the 259 (at contrary not against the floods!) but he not has see the Mandilion, which at least after the previous reconstruction should have been in Edessa. Soon after this reconstruction, the Shroud was certainly in possession of Ethalah, and he could musted making all to keep the Shroud at the church consecrated in the 324, there leaving it in the year 346... or he maked better to put it in a sure place, away from the Aryans... they accepted immortality but not the eternity of Jesus: by PALUT or the heirs, it would be a madness the fact of allowing such "talisman" to whims of the Daisan river ...or of his heretics children! I add another reason at least worrying: Fanatics of relics (the same Christians) have tempted to possess these, or do a shreds for divide mutually a relic, at least until the Theodosian Codex of the year 435! I think therefore that in 346 Ethalah could be withdrawed with the Holy Shroud toward a monastery, undisclosed from rocks of the mounts and enough next to the Armenia (see following figures that preserves this memory): in the IV century, the asceticism and monastic life was developed in Cappadocia , that it had also big support from St. Basileo the Great, the Bishop of Caesarea after the year 370 and author of many works, decisive on the Trinity. Ethalah worked so that informations of the Sheet will not reach the Patriarchs of opposed tendencies (and thus it was until the mid-sixth century) while he leaved to hermits some instructions. In 525 there was a third flood, and Patriarch Asclepius have could take only the inventory of the damage before his death in Antioch (526). But from the year 527, by order of Justinian, the city was rebuilded including cathedral, where Procopius of Caesarea (527-565) will see the Shroud, and so he write (tout-court) that the Mandilion was recovered exactly in this church... not surprisingly, for we! Evagrius (536-610) "Scholastic" is more precise and reliable: after the construction of the Church, the Mandilion (Theoteuktos, "done by God" or more simply understood as "of an unknown origin") it was finally displayed to Justinian the Emperor, as it is also mentioned by many religious Hymns of Syria and on Byzantine icons. The lasts have framed always the Mandilion with flowers and lozenged grids; as the Abgar symbols (reminiscents of inflorescences today scarcely visible on the Shroud and its herringbone fabric) and as in the Vault of the Church of S. Daniel, as in the following figures. These patterns are typical of the more ancient Armenian textures and at least all that confirm the Syrian origin of the "cleaned Shroud" purchased by Joseph of Arimathea.
According to a legend narrated from Evagrius, during a siege of the Persians, the Patriarch of the city dreamed the "Mandilion" inside the cavity of a wall... and here for his suggestion the relic was founded by the besieged mans! Baradeus Patriarch was an ascetic, with "nomination" of Theodora of the year 541; it was actually a tireless missionary dedicated to the Mesopotamia Convents and beyond these, with the help of Arab camels: finally in 544 he was able to bring the Sheet in place, lighting the Lamp, which certainly could not remain active two hundred years after the reconstruction of the 324, as in the well known legend. I add that, from Ethalah to Baradeus, were many the Aryans between the Emperors and / or Patriarchs, what was more near the doctrine "Spiritual" of Mar-Mari than the "Christological" of PALUT, appointed by the Bishop of Antioch, joined to Rome, and none of the successors of this would have shown to the Aryans the Shroud: all that can suffice to explain its deliberated disappearance for about 200 years. Better, in the sixth century the public reappearance of the Shroud became a necessity because the monks, who rejected the writings of the Syrian priests, were persecuted by them: the ancient monasteries by now was no longer safe!
Note that in case was considered a fake this shroud, that was own in their hands, the Monophysites certainly would destroyed it!
"Iconoclasts"
Edessa Bishops (often Syriac and normally Monophysites) would certainly prefer to hide the Holy Shroud (up to some appearance) in the Catacombs during the Diaspora, as in the second as fourth century of the great persecution, as it happened also for the Sudarium of Jerusalem. For the Monophysites, each Person of the Trinity has only the Nature of God, and therefore they could not show, with the complete Shroud, the "death of God". The Miafisiti Armenians (evangelized by St. Bartholomew and St. Thaddeus) while accept the two natures in Christ, they say that prevail the divine nature. Perhaps both inherited the influence of the zealot Simon (he followed Thaddaeus in Syria, in first century) and Bar-Daisan (II century): from away they were united only by the refusal of the material representations of the Son of God, but of the Thaddeus "heritage" there was also the Holy Shroud, which was considered a taboo, and hence...
"For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light." (Luke 8,17).
Until the Chalcedon Council in the 451 AC, the contacts with the Romans were frequent, and in 197 at Edessa there was a first informal Council for the condemnation of pagan images In Catacombs Syriac-Roman of the third century, in the images the Christ is "lame" and with a curl in front: they was shy hints at the asymmetric foots and at the spot with shape "3" on the forehead; "timid" also in Rome, for not offer "the flank" at the Nestorians (in 431 they refused the Council of Ephesus for which the spiritual nature of Christ is separated from the corporal nature) and because only the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 has declared licit the veneration of images, against the iconoclasts (especially Byzantine): they withstanded until the Fourth Council of Constantinople "pro-Nicene" (870).
~
This paragraph for
:1° MILLENIUM: Constantine VII, Omar I, Baradeus, Bar Daisan, Mar Aggai, Abgar V..!
~