Season of the Witch : did the priest molest her?

did the priest molest her?

anna, the girl, kept telling the men not to leave her alone with debalzac, the priest. i admit, the priest was creepy, but did he actually touch her as she claimed? now, some people will say she was posssesed and that was the demon talking, but honestly when someone is possessed the person does have small windows of opprotunity to act themselves. So did he? the "demon" per say only comes out at the right moments usually, i.e. when they get to the town with the friars. he could have very well hurt her when she was imprisoned. is that what she's talking about?

Re: did the priest molest her?

No, but he did molest the young altar boy knight on numerous occasions

"Nate Robinson (5'9 180lbs) would whip Pau Gasols (7'0 250lbs) ass"
-Douche Goon, moron of IMDB

Re: did the priest molest her?

^

LOL, I knew somebody would answer that. I would, but you came first. XD

Re: did the priest molest her?

"I would, but you came first."

That's what she said!

"Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down. Makes her home."

Re: did the priest molest her?

"No, but he did molest the young altar boy knight on numerous occasions"

Did he like it ?

Re: did the priest molest her?

It was better than Robert Downey Jr. & Tobey Maguire in Satan's Alley :)

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: did the priest molest her?

God, how I hate trolls like you. It is absolutely IRRELEVANT if the film sucked or not. That's NOT what the OP was asking.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: did the priest molest her?

From the brief scene in the dungeons, it looked more like he tortured her, she has red welts on her back. He wouldn't have molested her, he was a priest and therefore celibate, and there is nothing in the film to suggest that he would dishonour his vows that way. And yes, torturing a young girl doesn't sound like honourable conduct at all, but in the context of medieval Europe, its pretty much normal.

Re: did the priest molest her?

i always wonder about idiots like you, it is perplexing. he was a priest, therefore celibate, so what? that doesn't mean there aren't imposters and corrupt people in any office. also, no matter what is considered common at a certain time doesn't make it any more moral or less heinous.

Re: did the priest molest her?

In the dungeon we saw the markings on her back, but they might just have been devil created illusions to gain sympathy from the Nick Cage character who was looking for someone to save in order to make amends for his numerous acts of evilbaddiness.

Re: did the priest molest her?

I think the intention of the film maker was for the demon to be in complete control of the girls body, and everything it did was to deceive each person in a different way.

If you watch throughout the movie, the girls face will often change between dirty / unattractive to pretty, sometimes this will happen in the same scene. It's already proven that it was able to make illusions, when it made the guy see his daughter.

Re: did the priest molest her?


If you watch throughout the movie, the girls face will often change between dirty / unattractive to pretty, sometimes this will happen in the same scene. It's already proven that it was able to make illusions, when it made the guy see his daughter.


Yeah. That was one of the great things about this movie, the details in the girls face/appearence/state of mind changing like that. :)

Re: did the priest molest her?

Next time try reading more carefully. Unfortunately you missed the point of that post and just made yourself look stupid.

Re: did the priest molest her?

And I always wonder about rude idiots like you. 'Ifeldmar' said there was nothing in the film to suggest that he would or did break his vows of celibacy, and this is absolutely true.

Nowhere did he say something like 'Priests take vows of celibacy, so they couldnt have molested those altar boys'. Can you *beep* read?

*beep* rude internet *beep* I bet you were so smug when you wrote that, di-ckwad.

Re: did the priest molest her?

They didn't say it specifically, but the implication is definitely there since they said that he took a vow of celibacy. The fact is, they brought it up as a reason for molestation not happening, but as we all know that vow means absolutely nothing. It's incredibly easy to break any simple verbal vow.

The really funny thing is how hypocritical you are. You get mad at the above poster for being a rude internet *beep* but you do the exact same thing to them. Not only that but your last sentence isn't even a complete thought.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

Re: did the priest molest her?

oh yeah, duh, he's a priest, he's celibate he COULDNT have molested her. y didnt i think o that.

Re: did the priest molest her?

He could, but nothing in the movie suggested he did it and so was the point of the post you reply to. Debelzac was presented as a man who keeps his vows and celibate is one of his vows. So we have no reason to believe (apart from the girl's talking) that THIS PARTICULAR priest did anything like that to her. Heck, even she never said this.

Re: did the priest molest her?


He wouldn't have molested her, he was a priest and therefore celibate, and there is nothing in the film to suggest that he would dishonour his vows that way


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm sorry but that has to be the funniest damn thing I've read today. Priests still take vows of celibacy, but some still molest kids or have other sexual desires. Taking a vow doesn't make it impossible to violate said vow.

That said, there is nothing to suggest he actually molested her as the OP suggested.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

Re: did the priest molest her?

Priest molest all the time.

Re: did the priest molest her?

"he was a priest and therefore celibate, and there is nothing in the film to suggest that he would dishonour his vows that way"

Seriously did you live in a cave and missed out on all the news about priests molesting boys (in real life I mean)?
Just because someone is a priest and celibate and whatever doesn't mean he can't sin. Even the pope could be a sinner.

And I'm pretty sure that even in medieval Europe it wasn't normal for priests to torture. I think you missed the point of being a priest.

Re: did the priest molest her?

What's a pederast?

Re: did the priest molest her?

its a homosexual priest with a foot fetish.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: did the priest molest her?

You know what's handy at a time like this? A dictionary:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pederasty

sexual relations between two males, especially when one of them is a minor.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

Re: did the priest molest her?

A pedophile who only likes boys.

Re: did the priest molest her?

Women, particularly young women, are often accused of being "possessed" or "insane" [in the language of today] because they accuse some man with status in society of having molested or raped or otherwise sexually abused them.

Re: did the priest molest her?

But but but she was indeed a demon (or the devil?).
So figures he didn't do such thing to her, well unless she wanted that because it was part of the plan.


No-one molest a demon.


Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!

Re: did the priest molest her?

For accuracy I suppose a priest would not have tortured her himself, but someone else would have. At the end of the movie, the girl says she never knew Behren, implicating that she was not once by her own senses during the entire trip, otherwise she would have known. It was the demon trying to trick everyone.

The movie was quite horrible though, so I wouldn't be amazed if she was actually tortured by him.

Re: did the priest molest her?

Actually, no, it is accurate to say that the priest did in fact torture her.
Priests were trained to torture people, for example to break every bone in someone's body in order to drive the demon away from them. It was believed that if they broke every bone, then the demon would not have anything to hold on to and it would have to leave the body.
Don't take this as an attack on you, I just wanted to clear that up. It's just one of the many misconceptions many of us have about those heresy trials, until we read books or take courses that deal with this issue.
It's fascinating (as well as obviously *beep* scary) to realize how people thought in those times.
What we think, when we look at it through our modern day eyes, is just evil, hipocrisy or plain sadism from the priests or the people who gathered to watch the execution of "heretics", is actually a deeply-held belief that priests and the majority of people had. I already gave the example of the "reasoning" behind breaking every bone in someone's body. There would also be the fact that the priests were adamant on extracting a confession, but it was supposed to be a heart-felt confession. Even if they tortured them, they gave them time to heal before taking their confession.

Re: did the priest molest her?

To throw in my opinion on the matter, while it is true that a vow of celibacy has meant nothing to many priests over history I think Debelzac was portrayed as someone who wouldn't. I personally think that the demon was trying to gain sympathy.

Re: did the priest molest her?

I agree - well said anaconda89.

Re: did the priest molest her?


Priests were trained to torture people, for example to break every bone in someone's body in order to drive the demon away from them. It was believed that if they broke every bone, then the demon would not have anything to hold on to and it would have to leave the body.

I'd like some sources on this, if you don't mind. Priests rarely did the torture themselves, and Catholic priests least of all. They were certainly not trained to torture people what's the point with that when you simply take the accused to the local henchman? The Catholics had the Inquisition, and not even the inquisitors performed the actual torture themselves. They oversaw it, supervised it, but torture was always left to the professionals. There are reasons why executioners were shunned by everyone, and torture is one of them. Priests, however, were not shunned, and would not have engaged in "unclean" tasks such as torture or execution. There were exceptions (I know of exactly one), but highly unlikely to have occurred among the Catholics, who were sticklers for red tape.

I have also never heard this nonsense about breaking every bone in the body. This was a secular capital punishment, called breaking on the wheel, but actually breaking every bone in the body was never done. What a tedious job that would be, and the condemned would be dead from internal bleeding and/or shock long before the last bone was broken anyway. And how would they go about with the vertebrae?

The policy of torture differed greatly from one nation to the next. Some places it was strictly prohibited. In Rome, torture could only be used if there was doubt as to the guilt of the defendant it was not allowed to be used to extract confession.

Re: did the priest molest her?

What shocks me is how similar much of this thinking is to the thinking behind the medical and psychological professions up through today. Believing female "hysteria" i.e. any behavior that appeared strange to the men in her life, was caused by a 'wandering uterus', was accepted theory in the medical community until Freud disproved that in the early 1900s. Doctors treated "hysteria" with everything from the bizarre [putting smelling salts at a woman's vagina to "lure" the uterus back to where it was supposed to be] to the disgusting [forcibly masturbating women "hysterics"]. Undoubtedly, the 'hysterectomy' came about as part of this so-called "treatment process" as well.
Meanwhile, women to this day are over-diagnosed with subjective "diseases" at the hands of psychologists who use such diagnoses to justify all manner of invasive, brutalizing treatments. The fact that ECT, originating as a variety of torture, exists today as so-called "psychological treatment", really says it all.
The fact that ECT is primarily used to treat depression, which women remain diagnosed with 75% more than men do, says a whole lot more.

Re: did the priest molest her?

" now, some people will say she was posssesed and that was the demon talking, but honestly when someone is possessed the person does have small windows of opprotunity to act themselves"

Care to explain how you know this?

Re: did the priest molest her?

No the priest did not molest her. It was the demon simply trying to create strife between Behman and the priest. The demon knew Behman was upset over the atrocities the church had committed and was one way it might get to him.

Re: did the priest molest her?

No, he did not rape her. If he would only try to touch her, she would kill him.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: did the priest molest her?

No, the priest did not. It was just the Demon screwing with them.

I don't get why the demon would try to cause conflicts between the escorts, since its goal was to just get to the monastary? I also don't get why the demon wouldn't just fly to the monastary and pwn the *beep* out of the book? All the monks were already dead, it would have been simple. Also, why does the demon bring along the monk, the only guy around for miles that could ruin his plan?

so much stupid *beep*

Re: did the priest molest her?

So that when the time comes to kill them all, she's already divided her escorts making them all the easier to kill.

And it seemed to be implied that the Demon didn't really know where the book was.

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

Re: did the priest molest her?

I doubt the priest touched her at all. If you listen, they discover that the demon wanted to go to where the monks where to destroy all of the Solomon verses, and also at every available occasion, the Demon lied and manipulated all the characters to its own end.

Behmen, if you recall, wanted the girl to have a fair trial at first because he thought that she was just a girl, but as the movie progressed, he turned and wanted the girl killed. It was the priest who saved the girl in the forest from Behmen, and to me that is not the action of someone trying to hide sins.

There where too many spoilers to hint early on that the girl was a witch/demon. Superhuman strength etc. If you watch the fight scenes in the prologue, both Behmen and Felson fight and beat their adversaries but the girl throws them around like a rag, and then the lad on the bridge where she picks him up with one hand

Anyway, back to the point, no touchy feely by the priest, just a very naughty demon lol

Re: did the priest molest her?

obviously not

Re: did the priest molest her?

No he didn't. That priest is an honourable man and in the film he doesn't make any bad thing to have us think otherwise. Also demon possessed her so she wasn't herself and demon knows Bhemen's mistrust on church and clergy after his crusade and he also killed a girl. So demon tried to decieve him by both using poor girl image and mocking church and clergy. I think Delbazaq didn't personaly torture her but maybe use someone for torturing or maybe it was cardinal afterall we can't know it.

Re: did the priest molest her?

Probably not. Watch the ending of the movie. It's most likely that she was pretending he abused her in order to gain Cage's trust.


now, some people will say she was posssesed and that was the demon talking, but honestly when someone is possessed the person does have small windows of opprotunity to act themselves.


Okay, hold on here. Are you honestly suggesting what I think you're suggesting? That demonic possession is real? Further that this movie represents a factual account of what happens to people who are possessed?

Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!

Re: did the priest molest her?

I think if you actually made it to the end it would be obvious that she was lying to get them against each other. She is a freaking demon after all. Once you realize she actually is a giant wing having mother *beep* that it should be obvious that she was *beep* with them the whole time. Even if the preist wanted to rape her I don't think she would let it happen. She would just snap him in half.

Re: did the priest molest her?

near the end of the film once the demon has been destroyed the girl looks like she is covered in goo but there is not a mark on her body she was not harmed by the priest in the jail it was a lie to get nic onside

Re: did the priest molest her?

I thought I saw scars or something on Claire's back when she was in the cell where we see her for the first time. Scars like she was whipped silly by someone. That someone being that Priest nutter no doubt. This could be what she meant by what he did to her. He probably whipped her with no mercy. The bastard!.

"Fear is the key - to what you want to be."

Re: did the priest molest her?

No, but it wasn't because he wasn't capable of molesting anyone. He would have been incapable of molesting her however, she would have torn him from limb to limb if he tried to do anything she didn't want him to do.

If you love Cheezits and are 100% proud of it, copy this as your signature.

Re: did the priest molest her?

She was the only pretty girl in the land without boils on her face, of course the monks took turns doing her. Debalzac (more a demon name that a priest name if I ever heard one) just took her more times than the others, the greedy bugga.

Fun fact of the day: She ended up marrying that guy and had a (demon) baby with him IRL. They probably met on this movie.
Top