Home > Other Sites > An American Jew in Favor of Authenticity

An American Jew in Favor of Authenticity

May 15, 2015

modern science is still incapable

imageDICI, the communication arm of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX – founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) has an article about Barrie Schwortz’ position on the shroud. The dateline is May 15, 2015, Italy:  An American Jew in favor of the authenticity of the Holy Shroud of Turin:

  Among its fiercest defenders is Barrie Schwortz, and orthodox Jew from Los Angeles. A professional photographer, he was the head of documentary and scientific photography during the first research on the cloth in 1978. He declares that modern science is still incapable of explaining how the image was formed on the cloth. According to him, several factors prove its authenticity.

As a photographer, he considers that the image itself is the most convincing element. “It has properties that I have never seen in any other image,” he insists, recalling that in the last four decades, no one has been able to duplicate or create a print with the same chemical or physical properties.

He also reveals that the counterfeit artists of the Middle Ages were far from having the necessary knowledge to reproduce the anatomical elements revealed by the forensic study of the image, especially the blood flow, which corresponds perfectly with the anatomy and physiology of blood circulation and coagulation.

Barrie Schwortz ends by pointing out that the scientific debates will “probably never be resolved,” partly “because the research is biased by huge ideological implications.”

It goes to word selection. It is probably nothing more than crappy paraphrasing when we read, “modern science is still incapable.”  No, no, of course not. Science isn’t incapable. It is better to report that modern science is still without an answer.

  1. anoxie
    May 15, 2015 at 7:50 am

    “It is probably nothing more than crappy paraphrasing when we read, “modern science is still incapable.””

    A lot of simple things in science turn out to be complicated, see the physics of coffee stains: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139681851/scientists-crack-the-physics-of-coffee-rings

    The science of what happened on the Shroud is made of a series complex steps.

    So when you read such claims, keep in mind we had a poor understanding of coffee stains until 2011…

  2. May 15, 2015 at 7:52 am

    Barrie Schwartz is a Hero, you cannot have the Shroud with out the Kin of Our Lord. Remember His Kin are The Jewish People… Thank you Barrie Schwartz and all of you please pray for me.

  3. May 15, 2015 at 7:54 am

    Barrie Schwortz is a Hero. A unique Hero.

    • Dan
      May 15, 2015 at 8:54 am

      I agree. And I know Barrie to be precisely correct.

      • joshua
        May 15, 2015 at 1:28 pm

        You know whats interesting? It seems that there are two things, that The Jewish People (Barrie is a member) are not afraid of or intimidated by, when it comes to Christianity, The Shroud of Turin, (The Holy Shroud) and The Person of The Sacred Virgin Mary. There is a really good documentary on Chartres Cathedral, they mentioned some of their pilgrims are Orthodox Jews… There are deep mysterious similarities between Traditional Catholics and The Orthodox Jewish communities… They have a similar vein… Its curious… Well thank you for this blog, its fascinating.

        .

        • Angel
          May 15, 2015 at 2:38 pm

          Hi, Joshua.

          What you have stated is true about Barrie Schwortz and your elaboration of “The Jewish People (Barrie is a member),” also brings to mind, lest we forget, Jesus is also a member.

          As an aside, I have seen more and more Messianic Rabbis, taking center stage in the media, trumpeting the name of Yehshua Ha-Messchiach.

          Blessings on you, Joshua. :)

          Best,

        • Angel
          May 15, 2015 at 2:42 pm

          edit: Yeshua Ha-Mashiach

  4. piero
    May 15, 2015 at 9:50 am

    Fortunately for us someone in the past (and still) has
    been busy for the Shroud …!
    The documentation of Barrie Schwotz is truly remarkable.
    — — —
    Instead it seems that the city of Palymira (UNESCO site)
    is ending in the hands of the barbarians of ISIS.

    It seems to me that in the museum of the city are preserved
    textile remains that are interesting also to understand the Shroud.
    Am I wrong?
    — —
    I hope that their goals are far from the Museum,
    perhaps are the destruction of the temple of Baal and
    and the damages to the main colonnaded avenue.

    I have read that:
    >The Temple of Baal is an ancient stone ruin located in Palmyra, Syria.
    The temple, consecrated to the Semitic god Baal, worshipped at Palmyra in triad with the lunar god Aglibol and the sun god Yarhibol, formed the center of religious life in Palmyra and was dedicated in 32 CE.
    >Aedeen Cremin considers its ruins the “best preserved” at Palmyra.

    >The Great Colonnade at Palmyra was the main colonnaded avenue
    in the ancient city of Palmyra in the Syrian Desert. The colonnade
    was built in several stages during the second and third century CE
    and stretched for more than a kilometer. It linked the Temple of Bel,
    in the southeastern end of the city, to the West Gate and
    the Funerary Temple in the northwestern part.

    Links:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_of_Bel

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Colonnade_at_Palmyra

    But all this (which covers the presumed or probable horrible
    destructive activities of ISIS) is therefore very far from
    the important (and longstanding) great documentation work
    of an American Jew … who is friend not only of leading researchers,
    experts on that Ancient Sheet, but friend of all the civilized World.

    The possible systematic demolition of idolatries can pass through
    the careful examination of Science. It is not with the destructive
    violence that leads citizens to monotheism (and here I want to clarify
    that I am neither Jew nor Muslim).

  5. Louis
    May 15, 2015 at 10:01 am

    The Society makes no mention of future testing, and there seems to be some agreement between its position, that of Cardinal Anastasio Balletrero and PAS Chancellor Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo. French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was misunderstood by Pope Paul VI, although he himself had been the victim of some of the things the prelate had been denouncing. His excommunication was lifted, but there is no chance of reconciliation between the Society and Rome if it depends on the German priest Father Franz Schmidberger. The Society’s seminary is in Econe, Switzerland:
    http://www.seminaire-econe.ch/gbcom/
    Rome is silent for the time being, and some of the reasons can be found in the last questions in the two following interviews:
    https://www.academia.edu/8841978/Professor_Giulio_Fanti_discusses_the_controversies_in_the_realm_of_Shroud_studies
    and
    https://www.academia.edu/11355553/Dr._Paolo_Di_Lazzaro_explains_his_research_on_image_formation_on_the_Shroud_of_Turin

    • piero
      May 16, 2015 at 5:17 am

      I do not want to controversy with anyone but I should mention that
      >Prominent members of the SSPX, including Lefebvre himself,
      have, at various times, expressed approval or support for a restoration
      of an absolutist French monarchy; the Vichy government (1940–1944);
      and the party of Jean-Marie le Pen.
      >On the basis of statements made by Bishop Richard Williamson,
      the Anti-Defamation League has accused the Society
      of being “mired in anti-Semitism”…

      But now I would like to remind (repeating my tedious “mantra”…)
      that you can get interesting information using AFM techniques.

      Nano-indentation allows for hardness and stiffness to be
      directly measured at the submicron level
      Burgert (see for example: “Micromechanics of Cell Walls”,
      Ingo Burgert and John W.C. Dunlop) indicated the study
      by Gindl W, Schoberl T (2004):
      “The significance of the elastic modulus of wood cell walls
      obtained from nanoindentation measurements.”
      (Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 35:1345–1349).

      So, Burgert recalled us that mechanical parameters
      (= elastic modulus and hardness) can be
      determined at the location of the indent
      (from the force–displacement curve and a knowledge
      of the shape of the tip).
      — — —
      You should then be able to work well
      (= without useless destructions) using
      the AFM apparels…

      There are many interests that can slow Shroud studies,
      but I would not want to be counted among those
      who have blocked or block scientific research …

  6. May 15, 2015 at 10:15 am

    Barrie Schwortz nailed it when he said “because the research is biased by huge ideological implications”. Many of the scientists, those who believe they are smarter than everyone else because they have an affinity for physics, chemistry, biology, are blinded by their own lack of objectivity when it comes to certain subjects such as God, spirituality and faith. They will continue to kick the can down the road with missives like “it’s a fake and we must do more testing” when confronted with challenges to recreate it themselves or to definitively explain how it got there.
    I can say I am objective on the subject of the Shroud, and when the results of the carbon-dating were published in 1988, I was disappointed, but able to accept it likely dated back to the Middle Ages.
    However, years later’ I ran into some of Ray Rogers studies and his opinions based on further, independent analysis (Let’s not forget, Rogers was one who believed the Shroud was a Medieval creation as he was heavily involved with the carbon-dating testing).
    After reading what Rogers had to say, as well as people like Barrie Schwortz, plus the discovery of pollen from plants that grow only in and around Jerusalem, plus the precision of the image, I have objectively determined it’s the burial cloth of Jesus.
    To me the image does not prove or disprove that there is a God, nor does it prove the resurrection of Jesus, but the evidence is overwhelming that it is Jesus’ burial cloth.
    And, no, the first the Shroud was mentioned is not the 14th or 15th century. The cloth was mentioned way back to at least the 5th century – “the Cloth of Edessa”.
    The face is the exact face on the Byzantine painting known as “Christos Pantocratur”. Ray Rogers determined this when he placed the face on the Shroud over 5th century painting and found the two figures are perfect matches except the eyes are closed on the face on the Shroud and it also shows evidence of bruising and injury.

    • Angel
      May 15, 2015 at 2:56 pm

      Hi, Leon.

      As well, check out google images “Justinian II pantocrator coin, gold solidus” and the silver vase, on this link below (this site).

      https://shroudstory.com/?s=ancient+silver+vase+with+image+of+Jesus

      The first and third image (first row) on the google images Justinian coins looks exactly as the image on the silver vase.

      Best,

  7. daveb of wellington nz
    May 15, 2015 at 3:32 pm

    The all-too-often preoccupation on this site with the question of authenticity, distracts from the message of the Shroud. As it is with the Shroud, so it was with Jesus. Many rejected him, a few accepted him. Among those who accepted him, they all too often broke up into individual warring sects. The first 500 years or so of Christianity, was dominated by abstruse questions of theology, and within these debates, his message of salvation and fraternal love was heard too seldom.

    A persistent message of recent Popes, has been what meditation on the image of the man of sorrows shown on the Shroud, can tell us about the suffering of the man Jesus, and it sets aside the question of whether it is the true burial cloth or not, a matter of lesser importance. We see too little of this message in the all too frequent contentious comments here.

    “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God. As the Scriptures say, “He traps the wise in the snare of their own cleverness.” ” I Cor 3:19

    • Angel
      May 15, 2015 at 7:31 pm

      Well said!

      Yet, you must keep in mind, Christians do not require evidence for (or proof of) His existence, but non-believers demand no less.

      With that in mind, the Shroud’s authenticity is detrimental to ultimately silencing the atheists.

      Just a thought.

      Best,

  8. May 15, 2015 at 10:38 pm

    Does it bug scientists they have yet to figure it out and seem to not even be close? Just wondering why the wording bothers you, Dan.

  9. May 16, 2015 at 12:36 am

    Not just for the benefit of The Shroud, but for the benefit of the Catholic Church and all of Christianity, keep the ISIS out of Rome.

    • daveb of wellington nz
      May 16, 2015 at 3:55 am

      Very likely the advance undercover agents and sleepers are already there and elsewhere in Europe. Are all the “refugees” crossing the Mediterranean from Libya bona fide?

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: