OOH! HE’S SO BUTCH

From THE TELEGRAPH:

In a leaflet issued to parishoners, the Rev Angus MacLeay used passages in the Bible to justify women playing a submissive role in local church life. He urged women to “submit to their husbands in everything”.

Mr MacLeay, a roundhead member of the General Synod, is opposed to the appointment of women bishops. He has campaigned vociferously for Reform.

The leaflet he issued It says at one point: “Wives are to submit to their husbands in everything in recognition of the fact that husbands are head of the family as Christ is head of the church. This is the way God has ordered their relationships with each other and Christian marriage cannot function well without it. It would seem that women should remain silent....if their questions could legitimately be answered by their husbands at home."

In a sermon days later, his curate, the Rev Mark Oden, stated that the behaviour of modern women was to blame for Britain’s high divorce rate.

He said: “We know marriage is not working. We only need to look at figures – one in four children have divorced parents. Wives, submit to your own husbands.”

The views of Mr MacLeay and his curate are understood to have prompted dozens of women parishioners to cancel their direct debit subscriptions to St Nicholas’s.

One disenchanted female parishioner said she was “disgusted” by the sermon.

“How can they talk that way in the 21st century?” she said. “No wonder the Church is losing touch if this is the kind of gobbledegook they want us to believe it."

Another woman, who also asked to remain anonymous, said: "We're supposed to let out husbands talk for us and remain silent? What kind of medieval sermon is that? We are not in the 15th Century. I have already cancelled by direct debit to the church."

Mr Oden said: “I did not set out to unnecessarily offend people, but I stand by what God has said in his word, The Bible. “I am passionate about helping people.

COMMENT: MadPriest says: BDSM is an enjoyable and harmless hobby if practiced safely and kept at home. However, it has no place in the modern Church Of England except on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday.

Comments

OOH! HE’S SO BUTCH — 25 Comments

  1. A hosehold? That’s a new one on me, but then I’m no expert on these modern fetishes. It was just canes and slippers when I was at school.

  2. Mr MacLeay, a roundhead member of the General Synod

    This fellow is nowhere near manly enough to be a proper roundhead. The real roundheads would have bitch-slapped him into submission and made him run away crying at once. And that would have been just the women.

    The mere look of him in the photo makes me itch to smack him round the head with a dead kipper. And his idiot mate the Rev Oden. Not that it would knock any sense into either of them, I suppose.

  3. Sigh… this ‘interpetation’ of biblical texts to place some people in positions of greater power than others based on aspects of their existence over which they have no control(but which is of direct benefit to them) is counter to my reading of the boundary-busting inclusive message of equality that was Jesus’ life.

    Without wishing to put words into the mouths of these men, do they think that Christ was incarnate as male to save all men, or as human to save all humans?

  4. I’ve always said that anyone from the Church who is offended by my lack of submissiveness is free to refuse my tithe.

    Strangely enough, I never hear any church authorities who are worried about the women all over the world who pick up trash, pull weeds, make repairs, or do a whole host of other “unfeminine” things (usually without the express permission of a husband or father) on behalf of the church.

  5. Jesus’ life trumps (St.?) Paul’s idiocy.

    Please pass on for me this personal message to Rev. Angus: No way, Jose! I follow Jesus, not Paul. So take your heresy and…well, I’m a lady, so I won’t finish that sentiment.

    This **** makes me so mad. This is why women stayed in abusive marriages and as often as not got killed, murdered, for it. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

  6. Of course, I’m not the “marrying kind”, with a girl, anyway, but I couldn’t imagine wanting to be married to someone who deferred to me on all things. Isn’t that just creepy?

  7. On behalf of the Scottish nation and people, I’d like to apologise for exporting our worst eejits to the C of E.

    At least we didn’t give you Rowan Williams. (The sheep lovers beat us at Rugby today)

    Word verification “gumpact” – a truce between quarrelling dentists?

  8. Ruth, hackles are the hairs on the back of an animal’s neck (or in the case of birds, feathers) that become erect due to fright or anger.

    wv = uningre
    (anagram for gnu rein; otherwise, useless)

  9. Rev MacLeay tells the wives to “submit”
    Probably easy for him, stupid twit
    You try tell that to Ruth
    And she’ll knock out a tooth
    Thanks, but this’ll cause Hell where I sit.

  10. Poor, poor England! You guys used to know how to conduct a proper heresy trial and burning. And brother do you need one to torch this jerk!

    FWIW
    jimB

  11. Note that there are translations of Paul’s letter that indicate he quoted this passage but then repudiated it, although certainly the more usual translations do try to put the wimmenfolk in their place. I’d guess the passage has been deliberately mistranslated down through the centuries because it is a great excuse to tell the women to shut up. There are also discussions as to whether this passage was even meant to go where it is, or back in the house rules part. Nonetheless, some modern translations do show that Paul did intend to dismiss the idea that women should be silent in church or be completely submissive to their husbands. And where’s the heroic attempt by the menfolk to step up to the plate for the following bit about laying down their lives for their families? Just sayin’

  12. I can’t imagine a female canine submitting to this loser—fuhgeddabout a female Homo sapiens!

    [Probably secretly refers to non-submissive female Homo sapiens AS “female canines” (so to speak)]

  13. As Mary-Cauliflower indicated, why are these twits accepting tithes from women if the man of the house should be in control? Shouldn’t the man be doing the finances and giving his tithe? And if women are making money on their own, shouldn’t they be condemned and their ill-gotten gains (so unBiblical) not used to shore up their church?

    Fie on them and their unweeded gardens!

    –sheila–

  14. He looks like a cross between Mr. Bean and Mr. Rogers

    I knew there was a resemblance that had been bothering me. It is Mr Bean. Thank you, renzmqt

  15. Even more sadly, it would appear that the infamous leaflet – the text of which is freely available on the Reform website – http://www.reform.org.uk/pages/tm/wminlocalch.php – wasn’t written by MacLeay by a woman – “Carrie Sandom…the ‘student’s curate’ at St Andrew’s the Great, Cambridge”. According to The Times, the curate repeated his position from the pulpit this morning. Isn’t this the same parish that’s managed to wangle itself three seats around the table to pick the next Bishop of Rochester?

  16. Everytime I’ve heard this preached properly, it’s all about mutual submission (not really a good English translation of that word for the modern world anyway). i.e. spouses putting each other first, displaying the best of servanthood towards each other, etc… not this “I’m the boss, you uppity woman!” nonsense 😛

    Of course, this “servant” stuff doesn’t sell too well these days, either. But that’s another post 😉