When most people thought that it was absolutely impossible, David Ould, pumped up, yet again with his own self importance, proved everyone wrong. David sank to even lower depths, when he published hearsay, on both his, and
Standfirm's website, in order to denigrate Rev Sarah Macneil's reputation yet again. This man says he is a
man of God!
When I see a piece of commercial idolatry, I try to remember that it's trying to reset my agenda. It may be telling me that I'm the judge of some nefarious behaviour, so I remind myself that job belongs to God who will be looking at my actions just as closely.
Seriously... don't tell David Ould about the history of some Sydney Anglican elders, past and present because he might destroy the Sydney Anglican Diocese with one publication at Standfirm. Although, I reckon he'd be discredited ...just like Sarah...or maybe he'd be threatened with litigation. Seriously, you'd think some of those senior Sydney Anglicans would tell David to pull his head in !
Fair dinkim...and David Ould has the hide to tell a woman... who he harassed by email...when she dared to have a difference of opinion to him on his blog...that MY blog ..."encourages the most vile language about and treatment of those who they disagree with."
Well Calam...what do you expect from a someone who confirms his misogyny by supporting this statement...
There are a few basic things l cannot understand and find strange in these latter days, one being why women want to take on mens roles"
Pssst...Isn't a pity David Ould doesn't take any notice of what Sydney Anglicans publish on their website...
Is there no end to this nasty man's vendettas against those who dare to disagree with him? Ould is a vile excuse for a 'christian' who claims the right to pass judgement on others, in defiance of the scriptures he interminably quotes. He is stupid, vindictive and a shocking advertisement for Sydney Anglicanism.
ReplyDeletePlease don't think that David Ould's behaviour is condoned by most Sydney Anglicans. His attitude to those who do not share our beliefs is explicitly disavowed by many, even of the more conservative bent. But I do think, in turn, we should show him the kind of respect that we wish he would show others.
ReplyDeleteIt is time for Dobby to be sacked!
ReplyDeleteThey're not going to sack Dobby. It took them years to find someone who was prepared to slum it in Macquarie Fields. Dobby only took it because he had no other prospects and Phillip Jensen only agreed because he liked the prospect of the sneering that would greet Dobby's poncy mince and lisp out west.
DeleteWhy should the poor folks of Macquarie Fields be punished by having Dobby foisted upon them? Have they sinned in a previous life? There can be few things more traumatic than having David Ould as your pious minister.
ReplyDeleteAlas, I fear they are but the innocent victims of Phillip Jensen's wacky sense of humour. But, indeed, they have had to suffer terribly to fund Dobby's rapacious lifestyle - swimming pools, movie stars, etc. Look at the poor sods in this photo from their website. They are obviously starving or have acquired some weird post traumatic pituitary condition.
DeleteHere's the URL: http://www.glenquarieanglicans.net/about-us/our-people/
DeleteI haven't seen such strange-looking people since I watched The Adams Family movie. No wonder they chose a daft house elf to lead them to perdition.
ReplyDeleteDobby recently showed his arrogance by being offensively obnoxious to a popular English bishop. This ensures that if Ould ever wishes to return to his homeland, there'll never be a job for him in the UK!
ReplyDeletehttp://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/unity-truth-conscience-and-submission.html
Which reminds me … has anyone ever got to the bottom of Dobby’s brother, Prostate Pete’s, premature withdrawal from the rectory at Hertfordshire. Here’s Fr Christian breaking the news a few years ago: http://gafcon.blogspot.com.au/2011/04/poor-peter-ould-nobody-jump-to-any.html
ReplyDeleteI imagine that the members of David Ould's would have to be blessed with humility, tolerance and compassion in order to cope with David's pragmatism...to prevent a revolt or mass exodus. However it is a bit of a worry if this man is indoctrinating people in such a disadvantaged area in repressing women and gays.
ReplyDeleteDavid's pragmatism causes such deep hurt to those who genuinely care for women who have been so damaged by oppressive males and GLBT people who have suffered such terrible discrimination by church mentality which greatly influenced the broader society...in the past. God help David, or more importantly his children, should any be SSA. Will he troll the net to polarize opinion against one of them?
ReplyDeleteWell...I was hoping not to have to do this. But well perhaps you may be interested that I lodged a formal complaint with the Sydney Diocese in relation to his derogatory comments about myself and others on his blog and also about the somewhat intimidating emails he sent me event after he'd already censured me from his blog. The response was less that inspiring. Firstly in response to a specific request that the blog be removed, or at least the the Rev Ould be directed to delete the denigrating comments re. myself and others, I received a response from a Mr D.S. Marr, Registrar of the Anglican Church of the Diocese of Sydney stating "However, you should be aware that any comments expressed on a blog are merely the opinions of the person concerned. This applies to the person who manages the blog and also to anyone who chooses to comment. Blogs and the various forms of social media can tend to generate some comments which may not be appropriate but in many cases there is little which can realistically be done." I politely responded to Mr Marr that the blog was hardly private in that the Rev Ould clearly identifies himself as "Rector of Glenquarie Anglican Church in Sydney" in the "About David" section. I also referred him to press reports about the many public servants who had lost their jobs because of blog comments. In my complaint, I had argued that the Rev Ould's behaviour was inconsistent with the Sydney Diocese's Safe Ministry Guidelines. I eventually received a very legalistic formal response signed by Lachlan Bryant, Director, Professional Standards Unit referring me to the Discipline Ordinance 2006. Mr Bryant then went on to state "There is nothing in the disclosed conduct which would warrant activating the Ordinance procedures in this case. The behaviour of David Ould, as disclosed by you, is a matter to be raised with the Regional Bishop for Wollongong..." I am yet to hear from the good Bishop. Needless to say I was utterly disgusted...I feel the church really just hasn't learnt from the past and I just don't think its worth being involved in any capacity whatsoever anymore!
ReplyDeletePerhaps recourse to Civil Law might be a better bet, Fiona.
ReplyDeleteAdvice from a lawyer may reveal grounds to sue Ould for defamation. The world would be a safer place if Dobby were behind bars!
The unfortunate thing Fiona...is that when you don't know what David Ould is like you believe that you can genuinely make a comment that may take issue with his interpretation . It doesn't take long before he becomes competitive, offensive and defensive. Consequently he denigrates the person . We've all learnt the hard way.The manner in which he writes his blogs is meant to incite hatred against liberal Anglicans. What bishop would bother responding to someone like him. However , I think you can take issue with the Sydney Diocese because his blogs are featured on the Anglican Church League website . By the way...David Ould reported a UK priest to his Bishop for offense to him on a private blog...obviously clergy only have rights not parishoners.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes. That's what I figured. Unlike the Rev Ould, I thought that rather than mounting a personal vendetta on the internet I would go through the proper channels to express my concerns. Am a bit shocked that they would implicitly condone the Rev Ould's behaviour by not providing any meaningful response. I can't imagine any other workplace where someone would get away with this behaviour. It's a bit like a humble office worker in one department publicly calling for the sacking of various heads of department in their company as if they were company directors or whatever. Then when people come to the defense of the heads of department they are also told they don't belong in the company. Not only that they are accused of 'heresy' and it is made clear that all heretics go to hell! The Rev Ould claims not to be bullying, but endorses the quotation of biblical passages like "beware of false prophets", "You blind fools", "Watch out for those dogs" etc. But of course he is only quoting scripture - not calling anyone a dog or a blind fool! How this isn't bullying I don't know! He is presumably under the delusion that he is being a heroic whistle blower. Well, I feel it will be a very sad world if he and his ilk manage to take over the church. He doesn't see that the Evangelicals actually need the liberals for the church to survive. He may revel in short terms gains from evangelism etc. but he doesn't see the bigger picture about what a turn off this sort of Christianity is for most people and how many people initially start off in the evangelical wing and end up moving to a more liberal church when they see through the hypocrisy.
ReplyDeleteFiona... I've seriously considered your situation and I think that you should ask David Ould how best to bring disciplinary action against a member of the clergy because he has had great success and he never likes to be beaten so give it to him as a cause..
ReplyDeletePerhaps somebody needs to ask Doddy why he draws a salary as Rector of Glenquarrie when he clearly spends a substantial amount of his time on his blog and other social media activities that the Diocese claims are "personal"! Although perhaps this provides some respite for his poor parishioners. I agree that they must have some sterling qualities to have endured this far.
ReplyDeleteDobby is interested only in self-promotion. Serving his poor parishioners would go unnoticed and would fail to stroke his ego. One can be thankful that whilst he is abusing Chrstians on the internet, he hasn't time to be rude to people in the flesh.
ReplyDeleteHi Fiona
ReplyDeleteDavid Ould is cheered along by a few of the more conservative and strident Sydney Anglicans: for instance, Dominic Steele, Gordon Cheng and Gavin Poole (the current President of the Anglican Church League). They like to have someone like him doing their dirty work (and taking the rap if things go wrong) and Ould is pretty keen to please as he’s thrown his lot in with their faction. They have some pull in the diocese, though they are not currently the most powerful grouping - they couldn't get their man up for Archbishop. A number of major players in the other (less conservative) faction despise (perhaps too strong a word … perhaps not) Ould, and would like to shut him up as he presents a very unpalatable public image of the Syd Angs. This group includes the ambitious ‘young’ turks like Michael Jensen and John Dickson and, I presume, to some extent Glenn Davies (who they supported). You will remember that Ould campaigned vociferously for that other bloke for Archbishop (what was his name?) Phillip Jensen also opposed Davies but hates Ould because of a previous encounter. Anyway, the point is that Ould has lots of enemies, but he has some friends. St Andrew’s House doesn’t want to risk a stink over Ould given his prominent supporters; and he’s not really that much of a threat himself - more an irritant. So I wasn’t surprised that they fobbed you off. Frankly, I’m not sure what Peter Hayward, Ould’s Assistant Bishop, thinks of him, so I don’t know if you’ll have much joy there.
What I think would be your best bet to make Ould accountable would be to go to directly to the press with your experience, perhaps as part of the wider story of sexism in the Syd Angs. Ould sees himself as a bit of a media star and, as I’m sure you know, he has been on the show The Project a couple of times. A producer at The Project might well be interested in a story about the right-wing misogynist Anglican Minister conducting a vendetta against the first woman in Australia to lead a diocese of the Anglican Church (and, for good measure, attacking a gay-friendly minister in Goulburn) and use your experience as confirmation of his bigotry. The grubby politics of Sydney Anglicans has always held a fascination for the media. It would be an interesting twist on his previous appearances. Julia Baird might even be interested in your story. She has a particular interest in Syd Ang sexism. It’s worth emailing her and seeing what she thinks. Mike Carlton always like a good Sydney Anglican story too.
Anyway, good luck what ever you decide and let us know how it goes.
Thanks for the explanation. That helps.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I'm afraid I'm not really up for the publicity. I found it stressful enough to do the blogging. I made a complaint as I'm kind of in a good position to do so and I felt somebody should. In terms seeking further publicity, I'm also aware that there are other people named who might not welcome such publicity.
Maybe other people involved should also complain if they can. If there are enough complaints surely they have to do something.
I admire Roger's stirling efforts at standing up for Ron Bowers, but did you see the last post quoting bible passages about dogs etc. (referred to in a previous posting I think). It immediately follows Roger's post intimating he feels bullied. Ould claimed he wasn't being bullied but then allowed the most obnoxious posting. How can they bully so badly and stand sanctimoniously behind bible verses!
If it helps, I'm happy to pass on my emails and my correspondence with the Sydney Diocese. You can probably find me via my Google Profile as Ould did. If instead of hearing from Calamity or someone I get further intimidating emails I can just cancel my google account. I wasn't silly enough to use my main email account. Keep up the good work here - I'm glad someone is doing this.
"They hate him who reproves in the gate, and they abhor him who speaks the truth." (Amos 5:10, ESV) Actually, I think the great prophet of justice is on David Ould's side in this, and this blog and the comments only confirm that.
ReplyDeleteYou are obviously a mad scripture-quoting fundamentalist, Tim.
ReplyDeleteWith due respect to Mr Fountain, while it is perhaps conceivable that the good prophet Amos foresore Mr Ould's predicament 3000 years ago and wrote these words specifically with reference to him (he presumably writes his blog in a gatehouse?) is it not possible that he was referring to somewhat more contemporary affairs?
ReplyDeletePraise the (sometimes tardy) Lord!
ReplyDeleteDobby's pool is finally finished.
It has taken what must have seemed an eternity, but with grace and forbearance he has waited. That man, verily a saint, his abstemiousness should be an example to us all. Time has lumbered heavily since he returned from his three month around-the-globe pilgrimage to the eateries of the world and, aside from buying a house and some moderately priced but tasteful furniture and a smart new bike and a few other essential comforts, he has lived the life of the most wretched and afflicted ascète.
Oh, how the penurious (and slightly elongated) parishioners of the abject villages of Macquarie Fields must be rejoicing. For their master (nay, servant elf) can now, at last, be immersed by sweet Jesus in the pool by the sheep-gate (with tasteful pebbling). How they must pray his ailment soon be healed and he can squeeze, once again, into a clerical collar. For they too have felt the great pain of Satan’s cruel yoke that hangs around his neck. It is as if all the adipose has been sucked from them and placed in that lardaceous buccula he wears with such Job-like patience.
I notice that David Ould thinks a non-evangelical bishop, such as the possible appointment in the Riverina is Ok so long as he can find nothing 'provocative' as he scans the web. Such a relief. Ould himself of course would not say anything provocative about liberals!
ReplyDelete