Tuesday, November 16, 2010

WITH REALLY COOL GOATEES

Somebody must have ripped open a hole between realities or something because the Boston Globe writes about a Gene Robinson I’ve never heard of before:

V. Gene Robinson’s announcement last week that he will step down as New Hampshire’s Episcopal bishop may have shocked his congregants and made waves around the world, but his reasoning is hardly surprising:

It’s been months since someone wrote about him in a newspaper or a magazine.

After seven years of strain caused by the controversy surrounding his elevation as the first openly gay Anglican bishop — and a steady stream of death threats aimed at him and his partner

To hear Robbie tell it.

the bishop is ready to open a new, less public chapter of life.

That’s going to be just as public as it was before only without having to run a diocese or deal with a bunch of stupid, whining laity. Lay people can really get in the way of your speaking engagements.

They were also symbols of the Episcopal Church’s rocky road ahead. Robinson’s appointment precipitated a rift between liberal and conservative Anglicans, which almost caused a schism within the 476-year-old Communion.

If by “the 476-year-old Communion,” you actually mean the 142-year-old Communion and if by “almost caused a schism,” you mean actually did cause one.

It was only seven years ago that Robinson stood during his consecration ceremony surrounded by bodyguards, wearing a bulletproof vest.

While many were hailing Robinson as a civil-rights trailblazer, those safety measures stood as a reminder of the everyday sacrifices required of such pioneers.

If by “everyday sacrifices required of such pioneers,” you mean ludicrous overreactions designed to make Robbie out to be a Really Imporant Historical Symbol.

His retirement has been no different. It is unfortunate that the stresses of the job have caused him and his family great strain, and Robinson deserves a graceful exit off the public stage.

Which Robbie doesn’t plan on taking. For crying out loud, who is the Globe talking about?

No comments: