Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Guest Blogger: Dean Phillip Jensen.

Pithy opening sentences are a great way of masking a following nasty diatribe.

It’s a technique I use all the time. Of course most of you were hoping to see my brother the Archbishop of Sydney here, but he’s busy travelling the world in attempt to disrupt your churches while his own evangelism program fails miserably. So it is right and proper that I take his turn guest-blogging for Dr. Troll.

Who, you’ll see if you turn your Bible with me to the book of Romans, is not to be called “Father”. In this Word of Scripture, resting at the very heart of the Gospel (unlike the gospels, which evangelical scholars have conclusively determined were not written by Paul) you’ll find no mention of the popish superstition of addressing clergy as “Father”. Anyone doing so is in real danger of suddenly becoming a Roman Catholic. Just like what happens if you don't wear a business suit in church.

Interestingly, addressing someone as “Dean” was also an unreformed pagan superstition prior to my own appointment as Dean of Sydney. Which was made entirely on the basis of my own abilities. That it occurred just after my older brother became Archbishop (another title I correctly denounced as a popish anachronism until doing so became inconvenient when my brother's political chicanery gloriously trashed his opponents), is purely coincidental, and had nothing whatsoever to do with nepotism. As was also the case with my brother’s wife, or his son, or his son-in-law, or all the other members of our extended family now enjoying well-paid and secure appointments.

That understood, it should also be understood that the last time my brother (the Archbishop) let me speak to people outside of Sydney I did not call the Archbishop of Canterbury a prostitute. Even though the liberal media maliciously said I did, this was nothing more than an evil atheist conspiracy to misreport what I really said, which is that the Archbishop of Canterbury is a prostitute and King’s College is a temple to paganism. Is that understood?

As I say halfway down the page in an essay here on my modestly named new website www.phillipjensen.com, “There is no point complaining about trial by media.”. Although I’ve done just that in Synod, but then the circumstances were different. It was me on trial.

So putting that behind us, let’s examine the book of Romans. Did you know practicing homosexuals have almost led to the collapse of the worldwide Anglican Communion and the open persecution of orthodox faithful congregations and ministers.? If we look at the Bible, or better still, listen to me talk about it, we see that it is truly marvelous gift from God, who gives us the freedom to pick and choose whatever we like. Providing we do so in a way that demeans and intimidates those whom are different to ourselves. The more random and disjointed our style appears when written down the better. And that we bitterly criticize others who do exactly the same thing we do, but in order to arrive at a different conclusion.

Take for example the question of women: time and time again I hear the accusation that Biblical Christians are “misogynist”. This is of course nonsense; we love women. This is why we deign to give them such important roles as preparing our meals, cleaning up after us, washing our clothes, and having sex for procreative purposes. Our understanding that the church’s best paid jobs can only be filled by men has nothing to do with “misogyny”. As is plainly obvious to anyone who’s taken the time to agree with every word I’ve taught them.


Leonardo Ricardo said...

Such clarity! I´m inspired! (I wonder if it is possible to think less of the jensonian calvanist bug cluster?)

Anonymous said...


Dear Mr Jensen
I have heard your brother's Diocese is bankrupt. Is it true he's spent all the money on air tickets and hotel bills? How will hundreds of Jensens get paid now that Pete has spent all the Calvinist cash on his preaching tours? Does the bearded "prostitute" at Canterbury know?

Fred Schwartz said...

I note with particular interest the comment "people who look at the bible" I believe this is the new mantra for the Jensenites and the Conealoneialists. One may "look" but one must not "touch" -- the Bible that is. It is with delight that we are going back to a time when not only did Roman Cahtolics not read the Bible but neither do the Conealoneialists or the Jensenites. After all, wit hall these purple shirts who needs to read when these folks are fully prepared to tell us what is in the bible and how to use it.
Father Troll, better hurry back as your place is about to be taken by a Jensenite!