In 1977, tragedy struck in Judge Hyman Maas’s courtroom in Monroe County, New York. Eleven months earlier, on April 27, 1976, Sister Maureen Murphy, a Catholic nun and school teacher, secretly gave birth to a baby boy at the Our Lady of Lourdes parish convent in Brighton near Rochester. It is alleged that she suffocated the infant by placing a pair of panties in his mouth before disposing of his body in a wastebasket. After discovering the remains, authorities questioned Sister Maureen Murphy who was 36 years old and belonged to the Sisters of St. Joseph; however, she denied ever being pregnant.
Medical examiners at Genesee Hospital nearby found that Sister Maureen had recently given birth and hid her pregnancy while wearing a nun’s habit. Strangely, Sister Maureen claimed to have no memory of this happening. As a result, she was charged with first- and second-degree manslaughter, as well as criminally negligent homicide. The case gained significant media attention, prompting Ms. magazine to assign Catherine Breslin to cover the ten-day trial. Opting for a trial without a jury only heightened the already intense atmosphere in the courtroom.
During the late 1970s, there were doubts about whether a Catholic nun could receive a fair trial with a Jewish judge, even in an enlightened era. On March 5, newspapers nationwide reported the verdict delivered by the judge through United Press International. Although Sister Maureen’s defense acknowledged her involvement in the act, they presented arguments regarding the impact of blood loss during childbirth and the overall trauma she endured. These arguments implied that her judgment may have been affected and that she might not have been fully conscious during the incident. Additionally, they emphasized that her intention was not to cause harm to the baby.
Judge Maas concurred and acquitted her of all charges (see “Nun cleared of charges in son’s death,” The Bryan Times, Bryan, OH, March 5, 1977, 10). The account, shared three times The narrative seemed too compelling to confine it solely to journalistic work. Breslin, a former Catholic who had been brought up in a convent, opted to transform it into a book.
However, to avoid any potential libel issues since the defendant had been cleared, it was deemed wise to rename Sister Maureen Murphy as Sister Angela Flynn and portray her as a character in the novel Unholy Child (New York: The Dial Press, 1979; see “Nun’s Story Becomes a Novel,” New York Magazine, July 30, 1979, 9). According to C. Dennis Moore’s recent review on SFReader.com, the novel was rather monotonous, though he seemingly had no knowledge that it was based on a true story. In Unholy Child, Breslin, through the character of newspaper reporter Meg Gavin, seizes the opportunity to express her discontent with the church’s views on sexuality.
It is likely that the oppression Sister Angela experienced caused her to behave in the ways she did. Despite the lengthy 501-page novel not greatly captivating readers, there was a growing belief that Sister Maureen’s story focused less on her actions and more on what was done to her. Playwright and screenwriter John Pielmeier, who studied at the Catholic University of America, took on the task of further developing Sister Maureen. As a result, Sister Angela became Sister Agnes.
Pielmeier clearly had an understanding of the Latin mass, which was evident in his choice of name. In 1982, when his play was produced on Broadway, individuals like Breslin and Sister Maureen were still wellversed in the Latin mass. Even though I was raised in the post-Vatican II Catholic church and have limited recollection of the Latin rite, I recognized the allusion when I learned about the 1985 film adaptation starring Jane Fonda, Anne Bancroft, and Meg Tilly as Sister Agnes. This film was nominated for three Oscars and won Tilly a Golden Globe.
In the mid-1980s, our culture embraced victimhood as a significant aspect of understanding personal and social issues. Pielmeier transformed the character from initially being a victim of their own memory disorder and subsequently a victim of the church, into the ultimate victim, who suffered from society’s deepest secrets.
Sister Maureen, a long-time nun who was considered normal and well-balanced, contrasted with Sister Angela, who suffered from a mental illness. However, the focus now shifts to a young novitiate who speaks French. This individual has a history of abuse, with their most recent abuser being responsible for their current situation. The novitiate appears more childlike than adult and is extremely naive. As a result, the Mother Superior finds it easier to believe in a virgin conception occurring in their convent rather than the novitiate having been involved with a man. In accordance with contemporary times, instead of assigning a news reporter to investigate this matter further, the task falls upon Dr., a psychiatrist.
The film depicts Martha Livingston, who is now referred to as Sister Agnes. Pielmeier effectively conveys his message through the choice of title for his play and screenplay, Agnes of God, which unequivocally refers to the ultimate victim. The title makes a reference to a Christian affirmation from John 1:29: “Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” This verse is often incorporated in Christian worship services like the Lord’s Supper or communion service.
Sometimes, evangelists may encourage unbelievers in the audience to have faith in Jesus for salvation. We can only imagine how those who heard it directly from John must have reacted when he presented the humble appearance of Jesus of Nazareth. Did they anticipate a king? Why would they even consider a lamb? In the broader context of the Bible, this statement is both simple and profound, revealing and concealing truth through language that is both enigmatic and familiar.
Did anyone who heard it that day try to consider its implications? If the Messiah was going to be a lamb, it meant he would be offered as a sacrifice. This would have been evident to anyone familiar with altars, whether in the Jewish or pagan context. They would have also known that all such sacrifices were intended to appease or seek favor from a displeased deity. Over the past two thousand years, many Christians have come to overlook the significance of these words and the rich symbolism and underlying meaning they carry.
“In the Greek of the New Testament, the phrase ‘Lamb of God’ was referred to as ‘amnos tou theou’ (Αμνός του Θεού), but as the church rapidly expanded after the Day of Pentecost, there emerged Latin-speaking Christians who called it the ‘Agnus Dei’. It is clear that the film title ‘Agnes of God’ is intentionally reminiscent of this phrase. In Latin Bibles, John’s statement would be translated as ‘Ecce agnus Dei qui tollit peccatum mundi’ (John 1:29, Vulgate). However, in Pelmeier’s adaptation of the story, Sister Agnes takes on the role of a sacrificial lamb who bears the weight of others’ sins but does not actually remove them.”
The movie’s main focus is on the innocence of a victim rather than the actions of someone who sinned against the church and her own baby, leaving the guilt and stains unresolved. Pelmeier likely knew about St. Agnes of Rome, whose name is derived from the Greek word “hagnos” meaning “pure” and related to “hagios” meaning “holy.” Despite not being associated with the Latin word “agnus,” she is represented by a lamb and is honored as a patron saint of both virgins and rape victims, with two lambs being blessed on her feast day.
What better name to encapsulate the celebration of victimhood that became one of the “spiritual laws” of the gospel of therapy? Christ and Culture The high tide of Christianity’s influence on society began receding long ago, but the winds of change have yet to completely remove its imprint from the beaches of Western culture. What individuals do with those imprints depends on their agenda. The more educated among us understand what they used to signify to society in general; many are eager for them to represent something different.
Some individuals have no qualms about appropriating Christian language and symbols, likening them to hijacked Boeing jets aimed at destroying Christian doctrines. These accusers dismiss the biblical teaching that God, motivated by love for sinners, sent His Son as a sacrificial lamb to expiate our guilt, branding it as nothing more than “a form of cosmic child abuse.” Steve Chalke, for instance, expresses this viewpoint in his book The Lost Message of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI, USA: Zondervan, 2003), on page 182.
The text argues that a more subtle and subversive approach can be found in plays and movies like Agnes of God. These works aim to strip Christian words and symbols of their biblical significance and use them to promote non-Christian worldviews. In these works, Jesus is portrayed as merely an example to be followed, rather than as a Savior from sin or Lord of the universe. Furthermore, the cross is reduced to a mere artistic motif.
Simon the Sorcerer tries to buy the Holy Spirit’s supernatural power from Peter in Acts 8:9-24, just as modern cultural leaders try to exploit terms like “Lamb of God” for their own purposes, divorcing them from their true redemptive meaning. However, not only cultural elites, but also self-proclaimed Christians have played a significant part in eroding and undermining the true significance of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. They have sacrificed the Lamb.
Throughout the centuries, John the Baptist’s proclamation has served as a source of inspiration for numerous sermons, hymns, artworks, and scholarly writings. However, a noticeable trend appeared over time, where individuals attempted to approach Christ and His crucifixion while simultaneously disregarding and forsaking the Scriptures where His presence can be found (John 5:39). Some distanced themselves from the Scriptures not due to negligence, but rather due to aversion. These individuals did not desire the Christ depicted in Scripture – the Christ who partook in blood sacrifice and bore the burden of sin for His followers.
They desired to approach God through a Christ who appeared more suitable for their refined sensibilities. However, as the initial apostolic teachings about the crucifixion became tainted with incorrect beliefs and misunderstandings, the cross, which symbolized Jesus sacrificing Himself for humanity’s sins so that we could have a closer connection with God, seemed to increasingly create a divide between Him and His followers. In the late 7th century, Pope Sergius I added the Agnus Dei to the Latin mass.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis.
Agnus Dei, qui sedes ad dexteram patris, miserere nobis.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem. |
The form was modified around the end of the 10th century so that the first sentence was repeated twice followed by the third sentence from the original.
Praying these words with a proper understanding may make them acceptable for use in worship. However, the phrases “miserere nobis” (“have mercy upon us”) and “dona nobis pacem” (“grant us peace”) were not originally part of John the Baptist’s Agnus Dei. If not properly qualified, these phrases can cause significant misunderstanding.
Although we do find the first phrase in the gospels when a Canaanite woman beseeches Jesus for mercy and blind Bartimaeus cries out for mercy upon hearing Jesus passing by, it is important to note that after Christ’s resurrection, Scripture focuses more on the mercy that Christ has already guaranteed for believers rather than begging for His mercy.
Therefore, approaching these phrases with caution is necessary to avoid misinterpretation.
While it is still acceptable to ask God for specific blessings like our daily needs and physical well-being, believers should refrain from begging for eternal salvation. This is because God has already promised it to those who have faith in Him, as evidenced by the fact that we have been saved by His grace (Ephesians 2:4-5, ESV; emphasis added).
The request for peace can be summarized by recalling Paul’s words in Romans 5:1, ESV: “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (emphasis added). While it is important to pray for peace among people on earth, believers no longer need to pray for reconciliation with God. However, during the High Middle Ages (11th-13th centuries), there was a gradual decrease in understanding and acknowledging the complete mercy of God in Christ.
In this period, there was tension between Roman Catholicism and Greek Orthodoxy because of their different beliefs on purgatory. According to Jacques Le Goff’s book “The Birth of Purgatory,” Roman Catholics believed in a realm where Christians who had died were being consciously punished, while seeking mercy from the Lamb of God. This concept was not mentioned in the Bible (Le Goff 280-288).
And it is evident that they are not merely requesting the compassion of temporary existence, as they no longer had that, but for the eternal mercy that should have already been their right as believers on earth. In the second part of his Divine Comedy, Dante Alighieri (c. 1265–1321) expressed their heartfelt pleas in the language of his Italian compatriots: And then I heard voices, each one praying ___To the Lamb of God, who always ___Takes away our sins. “O Lamb of God” was their only song:
The people I heard were praying for peace and mercy, seeking forgiveness of their sins from the Lamb of God. Their prayers all began with “Agnus Dei” and blended together harmoniously. Dante Alighieri’s Purgatory explains that once the Lamb of God had absolved them of their sins, they would be able to enter heaven. However, despite their earthly belief and passing away, this had not yet occurred for some unknown reason. The apostolic doctrine that instructs us on sanctification through Jesus Christ’s sacrifice was gradually diminishing.
When Christians ceased to view Jesus as the ultimate representation of God’s mercy and forgiveness, encompassing the complete removal of our guilt by becoming the sacrificial Lamb who absolves us of all sin, the inevitable perspective towards Him became one of guilt. Considering all that He endured for our sake and the inadequate level of gratitude we have shown, it is reasonable to question whether we can truly claim to be dedicated Christians. How can we assume that we can effortlessly enter heaven after treating Him with such disrespect?
According to church history, the human psyche can only bear such a load for a limited time before distancing itself from the origin of its suffering. This also means distancing itself from the true nature of Christ and His accomplishments. Much of Western secular history revolves around individuals who, in the past, rejected the misconceived perception of Christ as an inaccessible and aloof figure. They refused to accept that all their sins have been fully absolved and neglected to replace this false image with biblical truth.
When the true essence of the Christian faith is perverted into something that oppresses the soul and tyrannizes the conscience, society can tolerate it for a long time. However, eventually, there will be voices of hatred and criticism against it, where people will reject the legalistic distortion of the Gospel and clamor for an alternative gospel. They will seek a gospel that is less severe and avoids discussing uncomfortable subjects such as sin, punishment, and God’s wrath, while still emphasizing themes of grace and mercy. This is evident in today’s society.
Despite the darkest spiritual periods in church history, when some misused the concept of “the wrath of the Lamb” to oppress and control believers, true Christians always maintained the understanding that Jesus was the one who suffered and that it was due to the sins we committed against God. It is alarming to see how far our post-Christian society has strayed from its original beliefs!
Recently, it has become more widely accepted that the concept of “sin” is not solely about our own wrongdoing, but also about the offenses committed against us by others. This idea was previously met with incredulous derision within the professing church. In the film Agnes of God, Dr. Martha Livingston asks Agnes who is responsible for her actions. Agnes responds by flinging her arms against the wall and saying, “God! It was God,” as she falls to her knees. She then confesses that she will burn in hell because of her hatred towards God. Dr. Martha reassures Agnes that she will not burn in hell.
Livingston. “It’s alright to dislike him. ” “That’s enough,” said Mother Miriam. However, it is understandable to feel animosity towards a God Who condemns you for feeling resentful when He mistreats you. Nevertheless, the issue at hand is not about what God has done or allowed to happen to us. Rather, it is about our own actions, which ultimately go against God. Despite having sinned against Him and offended Him, He has chosen to come and bear all our offenses out of love, enabling us to love Him and be with Him forever. Without this, we have no hope.
