Original research team member says science still can't explain Shroud (with video)

cns ^ | April 24, 2013 | Lauren Colegrove

[NYer]

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Even with modern scientific technology, the Shroud of Turin continues to baffle researchers.

Barrie Schwortz was the documenting photographer for the Shroud of Turin research project in 1978, an in-depth examination of what many people believe to be the burial cloth of Jesus.

Raised in an Orthodox Jewish home, "it took me a long time to come to terms with the fact that I'm a Jew and involved with probably the most important relic of Christianity," Schwortz told Catholic News Service.

"Isn't it funny how God always picks a Jew to be the messenger," he said.



Schwortz said that he, along with the other members of the research team who came from various faith backgrounds, had to set aside personal beliefs and focus on the shroud itself rather than any religious implication it might carry.

"We were there to gather information ... to do empirical science and do it to the best of our abilities," Schwortz said. "It doesn't have anything to do with my personal religious beliefs. It has to do with the truth."

The Shroud of Turin is a 14-foot linen that has a full-length photonegative image of a wounded man on the front and back of the cloth. The scientific team spent five days analyzing the chemical and physical properties of the shroud, paying special attention to the topographical information showing depth that was encoded in the light and dark shading of the cloth.

"Our team went to Turin to answer one simple question: How was the image formed?" Schwortz said. "Ultimately, we failed.

"We could tell you what it's not -- not a painting, not a photograph, not a scorch, not a rubbing -- but we know of no mechanism to this day that can make an image with the same chemical and physical properties as the image on the shroud."

Testing has been performed on the shroud since the initial analyses, and the results continue to be contested. In 1988 carbon testing dated the cloth to the 12th century, leading many to conclude that the shroud is a medieval forgery.

In a paper published in 2005, chemist Raymond Rogers, member of the 1978 research team, challenged the claim that the shroud is a fake. He said the sample used in the 1988 carbon testing was a piece used to mend the cloth in the Middle Ages and that the methodology of the testing was erroneous.

Even though the controversy over the origin of the cloth does not seem like it will be determined any time soon, Schwortz said the shroud can still be regarded as a bridge between science and faith.

"I think the implication of the shroud, for those particularly of the Christian faith, is that this is a document that precisely coincides with the Gospel account of what was done to the man Jesus," he said.

Schwortz said the public online technical database -- www.shroud.com -- that the team created should be used as a tool to learn more about the physical attributes of the shroud, but that individuals should draw their own conclusions about what it means for their faith.

"People often ask me, 'Does this prove the resurrection?'" Schwortz said. "The shroud did not come with a book of instructions. So the answer to faith isn't going to be on that piece of cloth, but more likely in the eyes and the hearts of those who look upon it."

[HiTech RedNeck]

One of the few explicit clues left by the Lord surviving to the modern day that He really is king even over the laws of physics. And it is nice to see and probably a “praise the Lord” moment. But you could tell that already if you believed the bible.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Yep that’s the idea. The Shroud is a sign. When you travel to Chicago and you come across a sign saying it’s 100 miles to Chicago you don’t get out of your car and kiss the sign. You proceed to Chicago encouraged that you are drawing near.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Actually, from the description it kind of looks like Jesus stopped and folded the face cloth before leaving the tomb. After all, it would honor his Mom who doubtless told Him to fold His clothes neatly :-)

(And no I don’t mean a microgram of sarcasm or irreverence there. It would be so Jesus to do it.)

[Nabber]

Good discussion, but Dr. Zugibe who has done the most crucifixion pathology of anyone, determined in the 90s that the palms will support the body in this instance because the feet are supported by a crossbar. Dr. Zugibe describes the nail going through the crease of the thumb (in the palm) and then downward to an exit through the top of the wrist. This actually did support the victim a little better, yet confirms the many early images, paintings, and stigmata showing the wrist wound. This nailing method also breaks no bones. Zugibe’s volunteers further reported they could breathe quite normally in a sagging position. Christ died from severe trauma, of many different kinds, and not from asphyxiation. The Two Criminals had their legs broken as a “coup de grace” inflicting unacceptable trauma, and not because they would have asphyxiated. It was also thought that, if the Romans somehow were wrong about the person being dead, that it would keep the victim from crawling away. Google “Zugibe” and “Shroud”.

[Nabber]

“Reverence the Shroud”? Before being so quick to condemn this, consider that if the Shroud were acknowledged by all to be the Shroud of Christ (and so proven), that it is not just an image — it also contains the Blood of Christ.

I’m not saying that it has healing power, I’m just saying that, considering the Roman Catholic and most of the Protestant World reverence the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion, the Blood of Christ is extremely significant in itself.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Sounds rather bizarre that volunteers would agree to get literally nailed to crosses in the name of science. I guess they drew the line at getting their legs broken eh. Anyhow this truly was a Miracle Man who if He had wanted to keep from shedding blood at all, He easily could have willed it. And so any suffering He suffered, was suffered by His humble choice.

[Nabber]

“This actually did support the victim a little better, yet confirms the many early images, paintings, and stigmata showing the wrist wound.”

Sorry, I meant “showing the palm wound”.

[Nabber]

In line with your thoughts, consider the many experts who have described the face of Christ on the Shroud, as “peaceful”.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Well, the body and blood is considered by evangelicals to be consumed in a spiritual sense, with eating and drinking being metaphors for spiritual receiving. Even if bits of the body and blood were believed to be present there in the cloth with all their spiritual power, it wouldn’t be the shroud itself that was received, but the power of the blood and body as applicable.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Well it all concluded with an “it is finished.” Seems fitting enough for Christ, having concluded His suffering, to be at blissful peace again, this time augmented with the joy of all the lost that He just saved.

[Nabber]

“I guess they drew the line at getting their legs broken.” The volunteers were bound at the wrist, not nailed. And the situation of broken legs was simulated by the volunteers by hanging only by the wrists — they could still breathe just fine.

[papertyger]

The Shroud is a nice decorative detail, but it isn’t even needed for the work of redemption to happen.

I submit that demeaning that which God may have chosen to highlight is supercilious and the antithesis of humility. Indeed, any doctrinal confidence in the banality of a revelation should call into question the validity of said doctrine.

[NYer]

The typical evangelical response, if believing it genuine, is “Look what the Lord hath done here too. Praise Him!” Not, “I must fall on my knees before this wondrous Shroud.”

As a point of clarification, catholics do not fall on their knees and "adore" the shroud.

The Western (=Latin) Catholic Church is prone to praying on their knees. In the above image, what an evangelical might misinterpret as "worship" is actually, Latin Rite Catholics kneeling in prayer but doing so, before the shroud. We pray on our knees, but our prayers are always directed to God ... ALWAYS!

For us, the shroud is nothing more than symbolic .. that's it. Like evangelicals, we marvel at the image. At the request of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, the shroud was placed on televised public exhibit this year on Good Friday. The purpose in this was to draw catholics into reflection on the image of a crucified man to better assist us in appreciating what our Lord and Savior endured on that particular day. No crucifixion, no resurrection. No resurrection, no salvation.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I’d think that actually getting whipped and nailed with the pain and inflammation and at least the beginning of infections that accompanied, might create a different situation of vulnerability. Expert takes on this differ in details, but the Romans made sure it was nasty enough to be thoroughly dreaded.

[Nabber]

“Even if bits of the body and blood were believed to be present there in the cloth”

Consider that even all evangelicals acknowledge that Christ ascended bodily to the right hand of God, so that One of the Three Persons of God actually has a physical body — somewhere, we don’t know where, and He will return. He is Christ in spirit and flesh, even today. So his Blood remaining here on earth is significant — it is in a sense still part of Him.

You could make an argument that his Glorified Body doesn’t concern itself with lost blood, just as we aren’t when we give blood.

[HiTech RedNeck]

How is it demeaning to denigrate the salvation of those who haven’t seen the Shroud but believed? It is a sign. It is helpful to some. You argue according to the fallacy of the excluded middle.

[HiTech RedNeck]

And did He gather all the bits up upon resurrection... we don’t have enough evidence to say no or yes. It seems the Shroud is rather clean, not gummed up with stuff, though some could be explained by bacterial consumption.

[HiTech RedNeck]

* How is it NOT demeaning...

[HiTech RedNeck]

I concur if that is how it is officially supposed to be regarded, praising the Lord for this evidence He has created of the work of Christ, it would be a correct theological approach. I’ve struggled personally with the issue of spirits associated with “things,” and know that discernment has to be exercised because the devil can play games with what God wants to be treated as holy, but that doesn’t mean the Holy Spirit can’t manifest in conjunction with an object as well.

[papertyger]

You argue according to the fallacy of the excluded middle.

Please diagram your assertion.