Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Peter Ould brings up the rear.

As everyone knows, Conservative Biblical Bible-believers are not obsessed with sex. Just because we talk about it at every opportunity, write about it incessantly, and recognize that a day in which a Christian hasn’t discussed sex is a day wasted, is in no way to be understood as evidence of any kind of obsession. Whatsoever. Sex is simply something we feel Jesus forgot to treat as seriously as He should have, and we’re just faithfully seeking to make up for His error.

Which is undoubtedly why the famous post-gay advocate Peter Ould has just given the world a post devoted entirely to bottom play titled “Conversation” (since the Ould lads often block links from Biblical blogs you may have to copy and paste into your browser to share in his idea of NSFW titillation). After all, what else does a young Curate who professes to no longer having any interest in playing at Liberace’s end of the piano have to think about? And who better qualified to discuss the medical aspects of what everyone knows all homosexualists (including the female ones) do all the time (except, perhaps, when they’re being bashed, murdered, or vilified) than a Curate with no medical training?

In fact so profoundly impressive is Peter Ould’s rectal recitation that a leading Conservative British blog is urging grateful readers to contact Prostate Pete’s Bishop and tell His Grace how much they appreciate the Curate of Ware’s commitment to colonic conversation. This is a marvellous idea, and I urge all My Beloved Sinners to do likewise. I have personally emailed the Rt. Revd. Alan Gregory Clayton Smith to congratulate him on becoming Britain’s First Bishop of Bum-Fun, and there can be no doubt he’ll be almost as delighted to receive similar encouragement from all of you.

Not, of course, that there is anything particularly new about engaging in theological conversation regarding one’s favourite position. Here at St. Onuphrius’ my Wednesday evening class in Foundational Theology has featured fortnightly seminars on the “Reverse Cowgirl” for years. Still, I have it on good authority that Peter Ould - whom, as I may have mentioned, really isn’t obsessed with sex - will be very soon moving away from his customary anal fixation, and into the hitherto un-evangelically-explored territory of the “Angry Dragon” and “Dirty Sanchez”. (Google them if you really must, but don’t say you haven’t been warned. And whatever you do, please don’t do so at your place of employment. Unless you work for fundamentalists, in which case in 5 years time when all the fuss has died down and you’ve managed to build a new life you’ll thank me for getting you out of there.)

I’m Father Christian and I teach the Bible.


Anonymous said...

Dear Father

Greetings from downunder.

I was about to email you that very link to receive your pastoral guidance!

I particularly liked:

"Part of the point of this site is that we can discuss these things and their relationship to spirituality and orthodox theology without someone thinking that we're being vulgar. If you *were* really being vulgar I would have deleted your comment!"

God does indeed move in jaw-droppingly mysterious ways.

Mel K

Anonymous said...

If any of you become too aroused by the thought of Prostate Pete talking dirty, just look at this picture to make those lustful thoughts go away!

Anonymous said...

I fear Mr Ould's Bishop may have to take sick leave when he is inundated with emails about a man's anus. Church of England Bishops don't like thinking about the use to which many evangelical clergy put their bottoms. As usual, Father your profound exegesis of Mr Ould's view of the anus is both enlightening and vomit-inducing. I must go and lie down.

The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

Mel K: I like the boy's (undoubtedly unconscious) admission that spirituality and what he terms "orthodox theology" are distinct from each other. As for the rest of his caveat, it really needs a brief glossary:

"this site" = "my site, which is all about my experience, which is directly applicable to you because it's about me"

"we can discuss" = "you listen with rapt attention as I tell you what to think"

being vulgar = "disagreeing with me"


Anon 8:39: It's all in the eye of the beholder: upon viewing that picture of those two laymen in their colorful pantomime costumes Bishop Quinine immediately printed 3 copies on the glossiest paper her could find and raced off with them to bushes behind the change rooms and the bottom of the sports field.

Everyone else - myself included - , however, does indeed find it the visual equivalent of bromide in one's tea.


Father Carte: I see the St. Alban's Diocesan website indicates that Bishop Alan Smith is unmarried. Do you think this might not make him more attentive to his curate's teaching, will will surely be useful to His Grace when he finally meets the right girl equipped with long and agile fingers and a bottle brush?

Anonymous said...

I am convinced that Mr Ould's unmarried Bishop adheres to God's Regulations requiring celibacy outside Holy Wedlock. He may, indeed, call upon Mr Ould for Sex Advice if he meets the right woman. There is no one more qualified to talk about Sex than a Hairless Bear.

MadPriest said...

Dear Father Christian, I notice that Ted Haggard has announced that if it wasn't for "his faith he would be a bisexual."

You are an acknowledged expert on such matters and so would you tell if this means that if I were to denounce my faith I would end up having twice the opportunity to score and twice as much fun?

Stan Firm said...

Wondered - bated breath - what was taking so long with your meditations on this topic (24 hours is an eternity when someone hands out something this juicy on a platter), but well worth the wait. Thank you, Father - an excellent post.

Shala-Jean Poole said...

Thank you, Anon, for this window into what became of Munchkins after the Yellow Brick Road.

Tobias said...

Well, comments are already closed over at Peter's place, so I was unable to say that I actually agree with him; that is, the "health effects" of various sexual activities (and his eerie focus on one in particular) are irrelevant to a discussion of orthodoxy.

Some astounding ignorance in the comments over there, especially from one who seems unaware that childbirth is a very risky and potentially damaging and deadly activity, the pain of which was inflicted as punishment for woman's predilection for fresh fruit, and through which only the grace of God can protect her* -- as every biblically orthodox teacher knows!

*Biblical citations on request, but of course the Truly Orthodox already know them, in a biblical sense.

Anonymous said...

Is there some some connection between Peter Ould and his stiff fetish?

Anonymous said...

Is this the meaning of the theological concept - "Stand Firm"?

Anonymous said...

Well taught once again, Dr. Christian.

I had not grasped the the scriptural hole that was being filled by bible-based Conservative Christian's seemingly obsessive focus on sex. Now that I know that they are standing firm-ly in for Jesus, I will pay more attention to the content of their conversations.

As you know, it's never too late to be filled by the spirit.

Anonymous said...

Pete truly puts the fundament in fundamentalist!