Posted on 01/08/2007 5:34:25 PM PST by dcnd9
Deliver Us From Evil Movie Synopsis: AND Movie Trailor: http://mcwindows.arcostream.com/media/arco/lionsgate/streams/windowsmedia/deliver_us_from_evil/dufe_Absolute_V18_Trlr_1B_300.wmv
"Deliver Us From Evil" is the story of Father Oliver O'Grady, the most notorious pedophile in the history of the modern Catholic Church. Completely lacking in moral fiber and devoid of any sense of shame or guilt, O'Grady used his charm and authority to violate dozens of faithful Catholic families across Northern California for more than two decades. His victims ranged from a nine month-old infant to the middle-aged mother of another adolescent victim.
Despite early warning signs and complaints from several parishes, the Church, in an elaborate shell game designed to avoid liability and deflect criticism, lied to parishioners and local law enforcement, while continuing to move O'Grady from parish to parish.
Over the years, O'Grady successfully exploited mothers and fathers in order to get to their children. His penchant for sexual mayhem was as essential to him as breathing, and internal Church documents prove that since 1973, he raped and sodomized with the full knowledge of his Catholic superiors.
Remarkably, "Deliver Us From Evil" filmmaker Amy Berg tracked down Father O'Grady and persuaded him to participate in the making of her film. O'Grady's account of his years in various Northern California parishes is chilling and he tells his story without remorse or self-reflection. Also included in the film is never-before-seen footage of the deposition of Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony and his former second-in-command, Monsignor Cain. She also interviews canon lawyer and medieval historian Fr. Thomas Doyle, former priests, lawyers and the abuse survivors themselves.
Director: Amy Berg Writer(s): Amy Berg Cast: Father Oliver O'Grady Release Date: October 13 2006 Official Site: Not Available Distributor: Lionsgate Genre: Documentary
Translation: "There is nothing wrong with abortion."
I think one of the main issues that many people have with the RCC is not that they are not perfect, but that they appear so hypocritical. They claim that they are the only true church, the representative of Christ on earth via the pope guy, yet they don't follow the very clear and very basic teachings of God's Word on what to do when someone in their midst blantantly sins (and a most disgusting and vile sin) much less one who is supposed to be a shepherd of the sheep. And it wasn't just one instance, but occured mulitples of multiples of times over many years. The fact that they have never repented nor confessed that how they handled this evil person must be addressed before they can be taken as ones who can be trusted to speak for God.
And you shall know them by there fruits.
I think one of the main issues that many people have with the RCC is not that they are not perfect, but that they appear so hypocritical. They claim that they are the only true church, the representative of Christ on earth via the pope guy, yet they don't follow the very clear and very basic teachings of God's Word on what to do when someone in their midst blantantly sins (and a most disgusting and vile sin) much less one who is supposed to be a shepherd of the sheep. And it wasn't just one instance, but occured mulitples of multiples of times over many years. The fact that they have never repented nor confessed that how they handled this evil person must be addressed before they can be taken as ones who can be trusted to speak for God.
And you shall know them by there fruits.
I recommend studying the Donatist heresy.
-A8
The gnostic idea of Church as the mere "set of all believers".
-A8
I don't think anyone should blindly trust either group. I place trust in the promises of Christ to his church, and then I place trust in the Scriptures, and then I read Hebrews 13:17, which commands obedience to Church authority (when it's being exercised lawfully).
There's no room for blind trust, and no need for it, either.
It doesn't. It makes Rome even MORE culpable.
If the patient doesn't take the prescribed medicine, do you blame the doctor?
You guys have some bizarre idea that Rome functions as some divinely-appointed Führer, as if they had only to name the tune and have everyone dance to it in instaneous and perfect obedience.
The reality on the ground is a bit more complex.
-A8
Validly, but not licitly if he doesn't have faculties to say Mass.
Once granted by the laying on of hands through the duly authorized hierarchic chain of command, his priestly secret superpowers cannot be taken from him (it's that Melchizedek thing).
But he can be forbidden to use them (except for hearing someone's confession if they're in danger of death), and probably is.
The Pope-Archbishop-Bishop relationship is not the same as the Doctor-Patient relationship and you know it. Your doctor can't excommunicate you.
You guys have some bizarre idea that Rome functions as some divinely-appointed Führer, as if they had only to name the tune and have everyone dance to it in instaneous and perfect obedience.
Hmm, I wonder where we could have gotten that idea from? Maybe from the fact that Catholics are REQUIRED to be in submission to the Bishop of Rome?
The reality on the ground is a bit more complex.
No, not really. It's only complex when the Catholic Apologists try to make it complex in their effort to muddy the waters and hand wave these issues away.
Huh????? What does that statement have to do with anything? Scripture itself, in many, many places says to flee from false teachers and not to stand with sinners. In any authority structure, the responsiblity of the behavior of the underlings ultimately rests on the at the top. One sin is the pedophiles who call themselves priests, and the other, even worse is the one of those in authority above those priests who do not follow God's Word and God's truth. Your statement actually shows more of what is wrong and sinful and NOT biblical or holy about the system in place called the RCC.
How can a person, looking for God's Truth, wanting to worship God place himself under the authority of vile sinners and those who condone them? Staying away and calling the sins for what they are is not schism in the body of Christ, but staying in that situation is biblically a schism as is easily seen. But for the sake of arguement if we say you are right in that not cowtowing to the RCC is a sin, then we have the choice of remanining under an auhtority that condones and supports pedeophiles wo prey on those who trust them, which is a sin, or to sin by leaving the sitatuion for those who do not condone it. I think most people would choose the latter. I pray that they would.
But we will all individually be accountable for whom we followed and the choices we meade - to be under the authority and condone those unrepentant ones who support and hide pedeophiles. Just as they will be held accountable for their actions also. In the end, there is just one Judge and we will all stand before Him.
Sts. Peter and Paul preached a faith that was winsome, though with their particular charisms, they had the power, i don't believe they spoke of their power to keep anyone out of heaven who believed that Jesus was the Son of God, who was born of the Blessed Virgin and Mother, who died for our iniquities and who rose from the dead and now sits at the right Hand of the Father.
Following is a piece by Catholic apologist, Art Sippo
So while we wish to be respectful of people from the Protestant religions, we cannot condone their religions since they are in both doctrinal and ecclesiastical error. Frankly, those professing any non-Catholic religion are endangering their souls. No amount of personal piety or private biblical interpretation can excuse this.Make no mistake about it. Antipathy to the Catholic Church is a sign of non-Election. Hatred of the Body of Christ is hatred of Christ himself (Matt 25:31ff). Ignoring the ordained ministers of Christ is ignoring Christ and thereby ignoring God as well (John 13:20).
When Protestants come to argue their petty little theories by which they seek to make void the word of God and follow the teachings of mere men, they are not on a level playing field with the Catholic Magisterium. Protestants can only give their own private opinions. The Catholic Magisterium speaks under the superintendence of the Holy Spirit (Matt 10:20).
In summary, the 16th Century Protestants apostatized and left the Catholic Church and have invented thousands of separate cults which not only contradict the Catholic Church but each other on serious points of doctrine. The Catholic Church has not changed any of her teachings since before there were Protestants. Consequently it is the Protestants who must now admit that we who have remained in the Catholic Church are true Christians and that we are entitled to our own interpretation of Scripture.[me: the language used here, 'entitled' is indicative, oddly sloppy and revealing.]
Conversely, it is not possible for Catholics to recognize any Protestant group as being on par with the Catholic Church. There will always be something deficient in them. Whatever partial goods they may have, the total package of true Christianity only subsists in Catholicism.
This is sound Catholic teaching, I believe. But, I don't believe there are many Catholics whose goal it is to attract converts who would then put this face of Catholicism forward. It isn't very winsome, is it? Do you hear the voice of Christ or that of Sts. Peter and Paul in that? I do not.
My 1952 Catechism teaches that it is a mortal sin to participate in Protestant worship. I'm not sure if that teaching has changed or not, but if it has, that presents a whole other can of worms. I can't imagine that Jesus would approve of that kind of ecclesial capriciousness, and the damage it does to His name and to the state of the souls of His sheep whom He leaves in the care of pastors who have the responsibility of seeking, heeding and leading them. See Peter and the responsibilities of the elders (bishops) and the youngers.
What is a mortal sin? In a nutshell, I think it can best be described as a grave offense, murder, rape, sodomy, missing Mass and/or a holy day of obligation, and perhaps still, participating in a Protestant liturgy by no means an exhaustive list, and what makes these sins mortal is having full knowledge that they are wrong and proceeding with the act anyway. If I remember correctly, a venial sin can be mortal, if I believe it to be mortal and proceed with the act anyway, and a mortal sin can be venial if I believe it is venial and commit the venial act in accordance with that confused understanding. If I die in a state of mortal sin, hell is my destiny.
I don't think Jesus was tyrannically bent. In all of the ways in which he was accused of departing from the Law, he makes clear that the Pharisees version of the law which they use to imply he's a heretic is not a legitimate part of the Law. It is an accretion and, in fact, an impediment to gaining understanding of what the Law of God proclaims and demands. Jesus was all about the Law too, but it was only He who knew or could know what the Law of God truly demands, and only He who could keep it fully and faithfully. I believe He knew we were not really capable of keeping it. That doesn't mean we should despise or abandon the law, though, just the opposite.
Yesterday, on another thread, discussion of murdering heretics was being discussed. The nobody should kill heretics line was followed by but this or but that, and that is emblematic of existing in a state of denial as it relates to the teachings of our Prince of Peace. When Peter cut off the ear of the soldier who was part of the mob ready to arrest Jesus, Jesus healed that soldier's ear. That soldier was in fact an 'enemy of God', but the Love of The Savior is incomparable.
Surmising who might be elect and who might not be is very dangerous business. Ethos, epochs, politics, struggles with enemies do not diminish that danger one iota. In fact to admit of their importance is to tacitly advance the idea that the gates of hell could prevail against the church, and that it is only man who can make sure that doesn't occur.
I think one of the reasons that the face put forward by present day Catholicism is capable of drawing converts to it is because it offers an avenue to sanctification that Evangelicalism struggles mightily to provide. When a solid doctrine of sanctification does not follow immediately upon the heels of justification, a hunger ensues and then a sense of displacement.
Most people who regularly attend church long to learn of sanctification and to become steadily more sanctified. Sin exists alongside the hunger to extirpate it. It has to, if we do not despise the law. That brings to life Jesus words when He tells us that His Yoke is light.
Thanks for listening, lupie. I want to leave you with a letter I wrote to the pastor of the church I've been attending for the last few weeks that shows my struggles and hopes. And with a quote from C.S. Lewis that shows why he was so loved, and shows just how well he understood the incomparable Love of Jesus and the humility that understanding that produces.
Dear Pastor ___,I've been thinking of all of you quite a bit since my visit with you last Sunday. My visit to your church and worship experience was sweet and so very warm.
I'm a bit worried, though Pastor, and if you don't mind I want to tell you why.
I'm not sure about all of the Tulip. I do think total depravity is accurate in that even among the best of us, evil lurks in the mind and heart. I'm constantly running back to the Cross. At Mass ran the refrain: "forgive me Lord, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do." But, the limited atonement I view in a way that is passive on the part of God and active on our part because St. John tells us that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
Why God hated Esau, I don't know, but I can't infer from that that he hates another who is created in His image who sits to the right or left of me on the bus, or on a bench or in a pew. In other words, "I have not been His counsellor!"
In addition to all of this, I wear a crucifix, I have a very old and very beautiful picture of Jesus in my apartment. Underneath this picture is small collection of palms that my Mother gave me from Palm Sunday, this year.
I don't think of myself as an idolater, Pastor, but it seems to me that all of these things might truly make me an accidental dissenter, and, as such, unfit to faithfully be part of the Reformed faith.
And so, Pastor, I felt compelled to make all of this known to you, as this old heart of mine can't take another realization that there isn't any place in Christendom to which I might belong.
I so enjoyed my visit with you and ______ and your lovely kids. Thank you for that, and please give your wife and kids a kiss for me.
Blessings,
C. S. Lewis, “Answers to Questions on Christianity” from GOD IN THE DOCK:When I first became a Christian, about fourteen years ago, I thought that I could do it on my own, by retiring to my rooms and reading theology, and wouldn’t go to the churches and Gospel Halls; . . . . I disliked very much their hymns which I considered to be fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music. But as I went on I saw the merit of it. I came up against different people of quite different outlooks and different education, and then gradually my conceit just began peeling off. I realized that the hymns (which were just sixth-rate music) were, nevertheless, being sung with devotion and benefit by an old saint in elastic-side boots in the opposite pew, and then you realize that you aren’t fit to clean those boots. It gets you out of your solitary conceit.
Amen. There just aren't many Bible verses more clear and truthful and instructive than that one.
Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel." -- Isaiah 5:20,24"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!...
>>Once granted by the laying on of hands through the duly authorized hierarchic chain of command, his priestly secret superpowers cannot be taken from him<<
Priestly secret superpowers granted by the laying of hands?
Are there decoder rings and x-ray specs as well?
It’s interesting to see how the oppressive mysticism of the Dark Ages still permeates the RCC.
Just amused at the hypocrisy displayed by many Romanist apologists..
My ex-RC husband says this is drilled into the heads of RC children from an early age and that to disengage from the mother ship of RCism is like being released into the vacuum of outer space, waiting to eventually ignite in a burst of flames.
What you hear in the voices of the reformed, AG, is a true and deep aversion toward the things you still cling to. I'm sorry for that. You know I think so highly of you and learn from every one of your posts. But part of our sanctification is God cleansing our heart of everything that is not Christ-centered, which includes crucifixes, palm fronds and calling Mary the "Blessed Virgin and Mother."
I think you must have had a lovely childhood, and a rich and exhuberant upbringing. And perhaps you confuse the love you feel for your family and your past with the faith God has given you. They really aren't the same thing. We're explicitly told to love Christ more than our past lives, more than our mothers and fathers, and even more than our children, which seems almost impossible to me. But that's what God tells us to do, and so we should work towards that end.
Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it." -- Habakkuk 2:18-19"What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make dumb idols?
Idols aren't just made of silver and gold and wood. They are ashes on foreheads and necklaces and calling men "Father" and a thousand other ways men have of putting something, anything, everything before the Triune God.
"Every one of us is, even from his mother's womb, a master craftsman of idols." -- John Calvin
"...whenever Scripture asserts the unity of God, it does not contend for a mere name, but also enjoins that nothing which belongs to Divinity be applied to any other; thus making it obvious in what respect pure religion differs from superstition..."
Zwingli and Calvin's aversion to pictures of Jesus is an excessive reaction to the excesses of Rome. The Incarnation is recapitulative (sp?;word?). There is no reason to find picutures of Jesus, who did live as Homo Vere after all, more offensive to the Faith of the apostles, than the divorce which we allow and condone outside of Jesus' qualifiers or the disgraceful way in which we do not truly honor the Sabbath.
To be reflexively anti-Catholic doctrine, is to embark upon a Romishess of one's own. We often become that which we hate because we don't have the capacity to admit our own error.
We are never going to see eye to eye on this, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.
good to see you posting again - hope you are feeling well
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.