People often say that Barrie Schwortz said this or that, thought this or that, believed this or that. Here is what I think. I tried for solid and representative quotations with links where possible.
Barrie, the Jewish photographer who documented the 1978 STURP scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin, has consistently maintained that while the Shroud may be authentic, it cannot prove the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Through multiple interviews, writings, and presentations spanning decades, he has articulated clear boundaries between scientific evidence and matters of faith.
Listen: The Shroud and the Jew
Barrie Schworz
at TEDx Viadella Conciliazione
His foundational position on science versus faith
“The Shroud is a test of faith, not a test of science. There comes a point with the Shroud where the science stops, and people have to decide for themselves.” NCRCatholic News Agency This statement from his 2015 Catholic News Agency interview encapsulates Schwortz’s core philosophy about the Shroud’s limitations as proof of supernatural events.
In the same interview, he emphasized that “science is unable to test for the sort of images that would be produced by a human body rising from the dead.” Catholic News Agency He explained that “it’s a pre-resurrection image, because if it were a post-resurrection image, it would be a living man – not a dead man.” Catholic News Agency This distinction is crucial to understanding his position: the Shroud shows evidence of death and crucifixion, not resurrection.
“The answer to faith isn’t going to be a piece of cloth,” Catholic News Agency Schwortz stated. “But, perhaps, the answer to faith is in the eyes and hearts of those who look upon it.” Catholic News Agency This reflects his belief that while the Shroud may inspire faith, it cannot serve as scientific proof of theological claims.
Evidence versus proof distinction
Throughout his career, Schwortz has carefully distinguished between what the Shroud provides as evidence versus what it can prove. In his official website introduction, he wrote: “Frankly, I am still Jewish, yet I believe the Shroud of Turin is the cloth that wrapped the man Jesus after he was crucified. That is not meant as a religious statement, but one based on my privileged position of direct involvement with many of the serious Shroud researchers in the world, and a thorough knowledge of the scientific data.” Shroud
Notably, he states only that it wrapped Jesus “after he was crucified” – making no claims about resurrection. This careful language reflects his consistent position that physical evidence can document the Passion but cannot extend to supernatural events.
His Jewish perspective on studying a Christian relic
Schwortz frequently discusses how his Jewish background affects his approach to Shroud research. “I think I serve God better this way, in my involvement in the Shroud, by being the last person in the world people would expect to be lecturing on what is, effectively, the ultimate Christian relic,” Catholic News AgencyNCR he told Catholic News Agency.
His faith journey is particularly revealing: “How many Jews can say it was the Shroud of Turin that brought them to faith in God? I can.” The Singju PostTownhall Yet this return to faith did not convert him to Christianity, precisely because he sees the Shroud as evidence of Jesus’s historical crucifixion, not proof of his divine resurrection.
In his TEDx Vatican presentation, Schwortz recounted his initial hesitation about joining the STURP team: “In the earliest stages of my involvement, I wondered whether someone raised as an Orthodox Jew should be a part of such a ‘Christian’ project.” Shroud When Don Lynn recruited him, Schwortz reportedly said, “It’s a Christian relic. Why would you want a Jew on the team?” Lynn’s response was: “You don’t think God wouldn’t want one of his chosen people on our team?” Catholic News Agency
Conference presentations and academic discussions
At conferences and academic venues, Schwortz has consistently maintained his position about the Shroud’s limitations. At his 2013 TEDx presentation at the Vatican, he described an encounter with a skeptical audience member: When someone said “you’ll never convince me,” Schwortz replied: “What makes you think I even care what you believe? That’s between you and God, take it up with Him.”
He added: “That’s when I realized that the idea of trying to convince people is not a good idea. Now, I’m sure in the early days, I probably tried but now, I just put the facts out there and let people decide for themselves.”
This educational approach, rather than evangelical one, characterizes his presentations at major Shroud conferences including the International Conferences on the Shroud of Turin and his work teaching at Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University in Rome. NCR
Media interviews and public statements
Across television appearances on History Channel, Discovery Channel, and numerous radio shows including Coast to Coast AM, BBS Radio TV Schwortz has maintained consistent messaging about the Shroud’s limitations. In interviews with B.C. Catholic, he explained: “For the Christian world it is a verification of everything the Gospels tell us about what was done to this Man. This is a document of the Passion.” Shroud of Turin Blog
This framing is significant – he describes the Shroud as documenting the Passion (suffering and crucifixion) rather than the Resurrection. His media appearances consistently emphasize what science can establish versus what remains beyond scientific methodology.
A frequently cited but unverified quote
The specific quote “If I thought it could [prove the Resurrection], I’d be a Christian” that circulates in various discussions about Schwortz could not be verified through comprehensive searches of available sources. While this quote captures the essence of his documented position, it does not appear in accessible interviews, writings, or presentations with verifiable attribution.
However, the sentiment is clearly reflected in his documented statements. His position as a Jewish researcher who believes in the Shroud’s authenticity but remains Jewish precisely demonstrates this theological boundary – he sees evidence of Jesus’s historical crucifixion but not proof of divine resurrection.
Methodology and limitations of physical evidence
Schwortz frequently emphasizes the limitations of scientific methodology when applied to supernatural claims. He has stated that there is “a strong implication that there is something beyond the basic science going on here,” Catholic News Agency but maintains that this doesn’t constitute proof of resurrection.
In various interviews, he’s explained: “The Shroud did not come with a book of instructions, and consequently, the meaning isn’t on the cloth but in the eye and in the heart of the beholder. Each person has to regard it, study it or not, and make up his own mind.” He adds: “It will not push to open your heart. You have to open your heart to it.”
Conclusion
Barrie Schwortz’s statements across multiple decades and platforms consistently maintain that the Shroud of Turin, while potentially authentic as Jesus’s burial cloth, cannot and does not prove the Resurrection. His Jewish faith perspective provides a unique lens through which he can accept the Shroud’s historical significance while maintaining clear boundaries about what physical evidence can establish regarding supernatural events. His position represents a careful balance between scientific rigor and respect for the faith implications others draw from the Shroud, emphasizing that ultimate questions of faith lie beyond the reach of scientific investigation.
Yes. And there is a 2013 book in Polish, an interview with Barrie where he describes his history and personal views: https://lubimyczytac.pl/ksiazka/175831/oblicze-prawdy-zyd-ktory-zbadal-calun-turynski About the same you mentioned gathering from numerous interviews with Barrie. Somehow, this book has not been published in English (which was certainly the original language they talked) while other books by Górny & Rosikon were.
I think with regards to the Shroud he always kept to the science leaving religious matters to each person’s believes. He was Jewish thus his stance was always special.
Barrie Schwortz was correct that the Shroud of Turin is not direct evidence of the Resurrection. However, those who see it that way are not wrong either. The image of a crucified man who suffered the cruelest torture and death was not intended to confirm Christ’s resurrection. It was intended by God to show humanity the unfathomable price paid by God Himself to redeem mankind. It is an image that should produce horror and heart break for Christians contemplating what Christ endured for us. I think it was particularly intended for our faithless modern age filled with comforts, scientific pride and religious skepticism. But if the image is miraculously formed and therefore supernatural, it also confirms the identity and claims of Jesus as the Son of God. In that sense, it does offer confirmation of Christ’s resurrection. But the actual proof of the Resurrection is to be found in the witness testimony and their miraculous empowerment as revealed in the New Testament.
A final word on the endless debate between Dan/Hugh and Teddi, O.K. and me (plus others). We are clearly at an impasse with both sides firmly fixed in their positions. But we all need to keep in mind that this Shroud debate is only a very small part of the larger question about the truth of Christianity and God’s existence. It is overwhelmingly clear that God is interactive with mankind and has been since the beginning. We have countless stories to that effect in both the Old and New Testaments. We also have numerous public miracles in the form of incorrupt bodies of saints and reports of miracles associated with them, for example, St. Francis of Assisi and the requirements for canonization.
But the most powerful miraculous testimony comes from what Fr. Robert Spitzer, S.J., Ph.D. presents in his book: “Christ, Science, and Reason: What We Can Know about Jesus, Mary, and Miracles” (2024). There he presents three astonishing and recent Eucharistic miracles from Mexico, Poland and Argentina. He presents the details of the Fatima “miracle of the sun” and astonishing healing miracles at Lourdes, France, associated with an apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to St. Bernadette Soubirous. He explains the incredible details of the Tilma of Guadalupe, an image of the Blessed Virgin Mary imprinted on rough cactus fiber cloth 500 years ago. The image is undimmed and the cloth undamaged despite its reasonable life span of about 20 years. His book also addresses the Shroud of Turin and explains why no carbon-14 dating may ever be reliable where that relic is concerned. Finally, we have the reports of thousands, maybe millions, of Near Death Experiences (NDEs) that convey to us the reality and nature of our infinitely loving God. Until these signs and wonders are all disproved, the faith of Christians is about as underwritten with facts and supernatural demonstrations as anyone could reasonably need or want. Refusal to believe after considering all of the evidence for God’s existence is to me just a refusal to believe no matter what the evidence shows. Whether motivated by obstinacy or some faith deficiency that we don’t understand, that refusal to believe is fundamentally irrational.
Cheers,
Jim
And regarding Barrie. I kept this for myself during his lifetime, due to the respect of him. But now after his death maybe I can explain for everyone, why it was so special in the fact that Barrie was Jewish with respect to the Shroud studies (which he always underlined in so gentle way).
Remember that Christianity and (rabbinical) Judaism had from the very start been on the opposite poles, antagonistic and hostile to each other. They developed in a parallel way (from the Second Temple Judaism of the First Century) during the first centuries of the Common Era underlining their fundamental differences (first of all the acceptance/rejection of Jesus as the Christ). Thus, it seems to me, Barrie had initial reservations when asked to participate in the STURP. For Orthodox Judaism, the acceptance for Jesus, the Christianity is the greatest bertrayal (remember “The Fiddler on the Roof”!). Jews who converted to the Christianity are no longer considered Jews in the eyes of their former kinsmen. This is not even about the resurrection of Jesus (who could even rose from the death, but this is irrelevant for Orthodox Jews) but His Divinity and Messianic claims.
And Barrie was always to his death loyal and faithful to his Jewish parentage and identity. Yet, as a honest person, based on evidence, he accepted the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin (like most rational people would do), that it belonged to historical Jesus. Nevertheless the questions about religious matters were deeply inconvenient and troublesome to him. He answered them in a very gently and polite way, as well as he could (and the questions in the style: “why did you not convert to Christianity?” must have been really arrogant and impudent in their ignorance). There was definitely a tension between his Jewish identity and the evidence of the Shroud he helped to gather and research.
I did understand this. How much complicated and unresolvable this situation must have been. Like many others for the Jewish minds who try to reconcile even the greatest contradictions. I do not judge. I once did write a review of Jacob Neusner’s great book “A rabbi talks with Jesus” and a polemical response (“A disciple of Jesus talks with the rabbi”) that was written in Poland by some Mirosław Rucki (I don’t know who he is, but presumably a Jew who converted to Christianity). Two great books (and some portions of the third one: “Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration” by Pope Benedict XVI, who did discuss Neusner’s views). And some of my own thoughts on Jewish-Christian relations (without any silly political correctness, mentioning things like Birkat ha-Minim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkat_haMinim -essentially a Jewish prayer for the holocaust of the Christians, though not all Jews pray it -but with a respect for great Jewish wisdom and gentle Jews like Barrie):
https://www.apologetyka.info/inne-tematy/rabin-rozmawia-z-jezusem-uczen-jezusa-i-papiez-rozmawiaja-z-rabinem-dlaczego-zydzi-nie-uznaja-jezusa-i-czy-powinni-recenzja,1590.htm
I consider the Shroud of Turin as authentic (and that it really suggests that Jesus rose from the dead). But when I see people who would like to use it as a hammer to forcefully nail their religious believes into the heads of the others, I am really upset!