Candidate for most outrageously (and, I presume, unintentionally) hilarious...

... sentence of the month. Nay, year.

From an April 26, 2010, New Yorker piece, "A Canterbury Tale"—with the subtitle, "The battle within the Church of England to allow women to be bishops"— penned by Jane Kramer (who has emoted for the magazine for nearly fifty years), this gut-splitting bit of rhetorical sputtering:

Rowan Williams, a theologian of huge distinction and, perhaps because of this, almost paralytic reticence, has been trying to broker a peace between his warring priests while Pope Benedict XVI, in Rome, a theologian of less distinction but far steelier entitlement, has seized the chance to publicly invite Anglican clergymen, single and married, and their parishes into the sheltering misogyny of the magisterium.

Be still, and know that she is venting...

(Big hat tip: CF)

Comments

[Charles E Flynn]

The last question and answer in Roz Chast's (intentionally) funny cartoon in the same issue apparently apply to Jane Kramer's understanding of the Catholic Church:

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/issuecartoons/2010/04/26/cartoons_20100419#slide=11

[Ed Peters]

"Rowan Williams, a theologian of huge distinction..."

See why one just can't parody modernity?

[David K. Monroe]

Excuse me, Rowan Williams is a more distinguished theologian than Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI?

I know that wasn't your "outrageously hilarious" sentence, but still...

[Kevin]

What's the matter, Carl? You're not seriously doubting the competence of New Yorker contributers to judge theological acumen, are you?

[Charles E Flynn]

The URL for the Roz Chast cartoon:

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/issuecartoons/2010/04/26/cartoons_20100419#slide=11

The end, in case it gets truncated, is:

slide=11

[Poppy Buxom]

As a cradle Episcopalian and long-time subscriber to The New Yorker, allow me to express my deep regret that the above-quoted sentence ever saw the light of day.

[Subvet]

"...Jane Kramer (who has emoted for the magazine for nearly fifty years)..." Time to put the old gal out to pasture.

[Brian J. Schuettler]

Outrageous and pathetic, but, for me, not hilarious. This unfortunate woman by the name of Jane Kramer personifies the mindset of present day Anglicanism as it slowly but surely slips off it's ill conceived and fatally flawed moorings like a badly manufactured, un-seaworthy vessel that has been recalled to port for disassembly.

[Carl E. Olson]

Brian: Let's it rack it up to my well-known charitable streak. ;-) It was hilarious to me in the sense of, "How can someone write something so incredibly ridiculous and insulting without even blinking?" Pathetic indeed!

[Charles E Flynn]

Jane Kramer is quite prolific:

http://www.newnewjournalism.com/bio.php?last_name=kramer

[Carl E. Olson]

To be fair, Rowan Williams is a far better theologian than Jane Kramer...

[joe]

The laughs are understandable, but the entire article needs to be answered carefully. The thinking exhibited there is *exactly* the thinking you run into at parishes everywhere amongst Catholics and their priests.

[Brian J. Schuettler]

First of all, comparing an Anglican "theologian" to a Catholic theologian is invalid. It is mixing apples and oranges, so to speak. Comparing Williams to N.T. Wright, a member of the same communion and fellow bishop, would be more useful, although even there the heterodox chaos of Anglicanism defeats true comparison principally due to the absense of true authority. Williams, by the way, in one of his first publications in the largely evangelical Grove Books series had the title "Eucharistic Sacrifice: the Roots of a Metaphor". Need more be said. Yes, actually there is. Perhaps we can compare the "theology" of Williams with a fellow heretic such as Hans Kung. But who in their right mind would want to read it.

[fidens]

The parenthetical suffix version:

"Rowan Williams, a theologian of huge distinction..." [because I agree with him].
"Pope Benedict XVI, in Rome, a theologian of less distinction" [because he is mean to girls].

[Ann Applegarth]

For an appalling glimpse of Rowan Williams's 21st Century England (and, I assure you, it is not hilarious), don't miss Mark Steyn's column on page 56 of this week's NATIONAL REVIEW.

[T. Shaw]

I'd like to read Miss Kramer's similar emotivity on mohammedanism.

No, wait! The filthy pagans are on target regarding two theological issues. They are effective in silencing liberal liars and highly salutary in their theology of women are chattel. [sarcasm off]