Friday, August 7, 2009

Peter Ould on Biblical Bum-Play (and Book-Burning).

Sadly it’s a rarely taught fact that what Jesus meant by ‘blaspheming against the Holy Spirit’ in Mark 3:29 is actually the wicked and unforgiveable sin of laughing at Conservative Bible Teachers. As Peter Ould’s new role model, L. Ron Hubbard, so eloquently demonstrated, anyone indulging in the heinous sin of failing to take pompous and self-important religious 'leaders' (especially the young and inexperienced ones) as seriously as they take themselves is indeed “fair game”. Consequently orthodox believers in freedom, free speech, and the personal accountability of each and every one of us before God, are perfectly within their rights to do whatever it takes to silence anyone daring to mock their arrogant pretensions to exegetical infallibility.

After all, if a post-homosexualist conservative can’t discuss bum-play (scroll down the comments to find the reference, or go to the link, press Ctrl-F and search for “G-Spot for all males”) when he feels the urge without people snickering things are worse than we thought. I ask you, how can anyone consider the following an odd tangent in a post about a Ruth Gledhill article:
“The prostate works as a G-Spot for all males, regardless of the sex of the person they’re having sex with. It’s not a proof of the validity of homosexual activity in and of itself. Plenty of wives have discovered how to access said prostate and husbands up and down the land are truly grateful.
I think that’s about as far as I’ll go on that one.”
... and just because he says a few comments later
“The things my wife and I enjoy doing are probably not the same things that other married couples enjoy doing…”
is certainly no reason to engage in speculation about why he feels this necessary to share. Nor can it be in any way considered inappropriate to the context of Ruth’s original topic. Can it? (Stop laughing, my Dearly Beloved Sinners!)

One of the many things I love about little Peter Ould is his refusal to recognize stereotypes. While some Conservatives are obsessed with 'curing' homosexuality, little Petie never swings the subject in that direction more frequently than 4 out of every five posts. (Alright – perhaps the real figure is 9 out of 10, but I’m a Conservative, so I’m allowed to exaggerate to make a point.) While like to be thought of as considering threats of litigation unacceptable for Christians (irrespective of what they actually do), little Peter takes pride in making vexatious threats.

Nor, surprisingly given his background, does he seem to have heard of Barbra Streisand. Or, to be more precise, The Streisand Effect. Which as a result of having done this is something that’s going to change.

I’m Father Christian and I teach the Bible.


Lapinbizarre said...

A shame Ould did not post this comment at Gledhill's site. Some of her more conservative regulars, hopelessly, nay terminally tight-assed, might well obtain relief from the advice.

Brother David said...

All this running around checking links here and there over the past two days have my imagination running wide about Petey & spouse.

Father forgive me for I have sinned. I have imagined little Petey Ould getting boinked doggy-style in the culo by Mrs. Petey with a strap-on penis.


The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

Careful Dah-veed! Any suggestion that your vision of Mr. Ould and his consort isn't the most inspiring image in all Christendom could result in you being threatened with legal action!

Leonard said...

¨...the most inspiring image in all Christendom could result in you being threatened with legal action!¨

Thats a hot one, go get him in Mexico (it will take years just to get the paper work rolling and then it will require, em, further considerations).

For me, this ¨inspiring image¨ makes me carsick and I´m in my bedroom.

-frank said...

Gay sex without 'the gay'?
Oh my, complementary cleaving. But is it kosher, er um, I mean orthodox? Wasn't there some OT admonition about taking papaya root up the bum?

Anonymous said...

There are few subjects less pleasant to contemplate than Parson Ould's rectum.

Please, let's turn the page on this discussion.

Brother David said...

it will take years just to get the paper work rolling and then it will require, em, further considerations

Those further considerations are a killer.


Our judicial system dates from the Spanish Conquest. We do not know the meaning of trial by jury. It is mostly who has the better lawyers and the most money for the further considerations.


I am but a man of modest means personally, as I assume is the little English curate. But I am from a village/family agricultural co-op. I have about a dozen close relatives who are lawyers and the co-op is a multimillion dollar venture.


Come on Petey. I double dog dare you!

BTW Good Father Troll, I was humbly seeking absolution from my impure thoughts. Have you nothing in your bag of tricks for me, a sinner of contrite heart?

June Butler said...

(Stop laughing, my Dearly Beloved Sinners!)

Sorry, Fr Christian, I can't do it.

...why he feels this necessary to share.

Why, oh why, indeed?

June Butler said...

PS: You can't make this stuff up.

The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

Ain't that the truth, Grandmère!!

Dah-veed: I don't normally absolve those who haven't sinned: you didn't imagine the picture in your mind - it was etched their by the Curate who felt called to share it with the world at large.

Nevertheless, I do indeed have plenty within my bag of tricks, although revealing any more at this point might just replace one troublesome image with another one. Suffice it to say then that your sins are indeed forgiven, including those which aren'tactually yours at all. If it helps you can pay penance by finding a bottle of body oil, and when sufficiently and pleasantly oily rolling seductively on a patch of warm grass. Make sure a friend films this for you, and then send a copy to both myself (purely for research purposes) and little Peter.

I guarantee he'll be so busy studying the results that we won't hear anything from him for weeks.

Anonymous said...

I have today been to a meeting with +Tom Wright's Suffragan - Bishop Tom being out of the country - and discussed the aforesaid Barbara Streisand Litigation. +Tom had received complaints about me from unknown persons. The Bishop of Jarrow seemed quite supportive, but only seemed to turn yellow when I began to discuss Mr Ould's Prostate.

Brother David said...

Bishop Tom being out of the country

What a surprise!

One of the big complaints from Orthodites regarding +New Hampshire is that they think that he travels too much and is never actually working in his diocese.

The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

That's the problem with these Bishops; despite years of experience in the church they just don't understand the ecstasy they could enjoy if they'd only listen to curates straight out of evangelical colleges.

The Werewolf Prophet said...

Dear Fr. Christian,

I am but a benighted member of TEC (in the American South, no less!) so I'm woefully ignorant of the eschatological and scatological significance of loathsome, odious, disgusting, nauseating, wretched, vile, vulgar, foul, crude and boorish displays of misplaced (Rowan) or enfeebled (Peter) hirsuteness on the part of the batshit crazy branch of Anglicanism.

Please enlighten me as to why these men wish to look like a deranged whisk broom or the south end of a northbound goat?

Toothily yours,