And What is Your Solution, Robin Edgar?

Seems that, whenever Robin Edgar runs out of ideas, he falls into the same tired old habits.  He finds one Google hit, which fits his incredibly narrow, fixated view that ‘UUs are bad’ for whatever reason he can come up with, then whips it into yet another lengthy rant about how – you guessed it – UUs are bad.

This time, he takes a single post, tracks it to two posts where others complain of negative experiences attending UU churches, and offers it as ‘proof’ that Unitarian Universalists are ‘un-welcoming.’

And does he offer any solution to this problem?  No, he doesn’t.  Which does not surprise us in the least.  It’s hard to get Robin Edgar to offer any practical solutions to any of the problems he complains about.  Considering how often he distorts and exaggerates these problems, and in a few cases manufactures them, we don’t see how he could find any such solutions.

Let’s also take a good look at his ‘evidence.’  One of the posts which he copies and pastes is close to three years old; the other is six years old.  For all he knows, the individual churches in question could have taken a good, hard look at themselves and made changes in how they greeted and interacted with newcomers.  Considering how the UUA has been developing programs over the past few years to help congregations address just these issues, you would think that he would look at the whole timeline and see that UUs are working on solutions to the problem.

Nope.  Robin Edgar needs a reason to complain, so why should he care about the facts?  Why should he do anything more than repeat years-old criticism like it’s yesterday’s news?  More important than that, why doesn’t he even bother with coming up with solutions of his own, instead of rehashing the same obsessive gripes?

At the very least, he could try starting his own independent spiritual community, open to all people, and ‘show ’em how its done,’ as they say.  Since he is listed as a contact for the breakaway American Unitarian Conference, why doesn’t he try starting a fellowship under their auspices?

No, Robin Edgar?

Apparently not.  He is too obsessed with accusing UUs of being ‘unwelcoming’ towards him that he is unable to be welcoming himself.

Not to mention the fact that the Unitarian Church of Montreal did welcome him as a member in 1993.  By 1997, his behaviour and demands had gotten so out of hand that the church’s leadership felt they had to suspend that membership for six months.  He responds with even more outrageous behaviour, both at church events and his picketing outside, not to mention his refusal to accept the written apology he demanded from Reverend Ray Drennan, that the UCM’s membership voted to expel him – after letting him give yet another lengthy, angry and almost incoherent defense of his actions (in which he actually compared the Board’s motion with the Spanish Inquisition, the assassination of John F. Kennedy and ‘ethnic cleansing’).

Robin Edgar was welcomed, and like an obnoxious party guest, he wore out his welcome.  He was told to leave, and told why.  But because he cannot accept that, and because the UUA will not punish the Montreal church as he sees fit, he now sees fit to punish all UUs for not conforming to his demands.

Well, Mister Edgar, if you want Unitarian Universalists to even consider your demands – whatever they may be – then we will repeat our condition for such: Go get professional help!  At the very least, you can dispel all the statements you so hate concerning your mental health.  At best, however, you could finally focus on the real problem here.

Mouvement Action Justice: Suckers?

American Universalist P.T. Barnum is famous for saying ‘There’s a sucker born every minute.’  Robin Edgar has certainly has his share.  He has often fooled others into buying into his endless complaints of ‘abuse’ by the Unitarian Church of Montreal and others.

His latest mark?  Montreal’s independent police watchdog group, Mouvement Action Justice, which let loose with his latest claims of abuse against the Montreal Police.

Apparently, the MAJ did not do its homework.  If they had, then they would have easily discovered that Robin Edgar’s ‘peaceful public protest’ is just a thin disguise for a campaign of vitriolic harassment.  They would have also found that the minister against which he complaints yet again, Reverend Ray Drennan, had left the church many years ago.

Then again, it could be that the MAJ simply accepts any and all complaints of ‘police abuse’ at face value, without ever checking their credibility.  Perhaps there is somebody in Montreal who can shed light on their history.

Even so, if the MAJ is indeed reliable, and they decide to look into the facts before following through with Robin Edgar’s ‘case’, we may find them moved to another list of individuals and groups – the ones who learned the hard way that this man is never satisfied with anything less than unquestioned support of everything he says and does, no matter how outlandish and inexcusable.

We can only wait and see how this plays out, as with the other melodramas created by this poor, disturbed man.

If Robin Edgar Loves ‘Protest’ So Much,…

Another repetitious blog post from Robin Edgar, this time standing in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal (and his mounted video camera), twirling his big orange signs, often looking over his shoulder, as he delivers yet another monologue about how so many people have done him wrong.  Unitarian Universalists have done him wrong.  Quebec Crown prosecutors have done him wrong.  Judges and police have done him wrong.  Why?

Well, let’s see now.  He engaged in a relentless campaign of harassment and disruptive behaviour, all because he did not like what Reverend Ray Drennan had to say about his insistence that an ‘interfaith celebration’ be held at the church every time there was a solar eclipse, all based on his own personal ‘revelation’.  It continues, and even escalates, long after he has been twice suspended from the church, and finally removed from membership.  He files a complaint with the Quebec Human Rights Commission, which is dismissed as being without merity.  He begins to harass the current minister, Reverend Diane Rollert, who gets a restraining order.

The church exercised its right to exclude a disruptive and malicious person from his attempts to impose his will on the rest of the congregation.  The police did their duty by responding to complaints.  The prosecutors and judges of Montreal’s courts did their duty in following through with those complaints.

So, what exactly did they do that was so wrong?  What did they do to deserve Robin Edgar?

From what we can tell, the only ‘crime’ these individuals and organizations did was dare to disagree with Robin Edgar.

Right now, the prime assertion which Robin Edgar is defending is an absolute right to engage in ‘peaceful public protest,’ as he is so apt to repeat over and over again (including a number of times in his three minute video).  How dare anybody try to intimidate him from trying to intimidate the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the Quebec Crown prosecutors by means of ‘peaceful public protest’, a/k/a ‘alternative spiritual practice’!  No, no, no!  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that right, and so he will exercise it whenever and wherever he wants, as often as he wants!

All right, then, Mister Edgar.  What if Unitarian, Crown prosecutors, and others who are fed up with your antics, decide to engage in ‘peaceful public protest’ against you?  Picketing outside of your home, your workplace, the coffee shop that you frequent?  Following you wherever you go, demanding ‘justice’ for your hypocritical and outrageous behaviour?  If you have the absolute right to harass others under the guise of ‘peaceful public protest’, then shouldn’t others have the absolute right to do the same to you?

It would not surprise us if somebody decided to do that.  Mind you, we are not saying that they should.  But, if they did, what possible argument would Robin Edgar have to say that they couldn’t?

Once Again…

Robin Edgar has posted another attack on the UUA and its Ministerial Fellowship Committee.  His message is at least consistent, in that he believes that if an organization or person does not do as he demands, then they must be endorsing the alleged offenses which he continually complains about.

Apparently, Mister Edgar believes that the MFC should police every single minister over every single word they say, and if any minister says anything of which he does not approve, then that minister ought to be punished right away.

And yet, Robin Edgar also believes that he is free to insult any and every Unitarian Universalist individual or group which he deems worthy of attack.  Here he seeks to dictate what conduct is ethical for UUs in general, and UU ministers in particular, while excusing himself from those very standards.

Once again, Robin Edgar has betrayed his own hypocrisy.  Unless, of course, he is somehow oblivious to the contradictions between how he behaves and what he demands of others.  Narcissists, after all, typically seem oblivious to how self-centered they are, as do many other people with deep-seated psychological problems and personality disorders.

All of this began because Robin Edgar alleged that a minister called him crazy.  For all we know, that minister may have said that others at the Unitarian Church of Montreal were concerned about his state of mind, because of the behaviour he was exhibiting.  Yes, we say ‘alleged’ because we have seen Robin Edgar play fast and loose with the truth before, whenever it suits him.  Considering how long this has gone on, and how unproductive it is, we can only hope that Mister Edgar realizes that the best course of action right now is to stop lashing out at so many people and get the professional help he so clearly needs.

Guilt By Association, Robin Edgar Style

It’s not enough for Robin Edgar to go out of his way to insult and offend any and every UU who does not fulfill his egocentric need for attention and retribution.  (Remember, dear readers, he admits that such behaviour is deliberate on his part.)  Now he has to insinuate that all UU leaders are complicit in any and every action of which he disapproves.

His latest target: The Board of Trustees of the Unitarian Universalist Association.

Why?  Well, let’s see…

He thinks Reverend Victoria Weinstein should be punished for certain statements made on her “Peacebang” blog, including statements which she herself removed.  If the Board does not agree, then the Board is complicit and therefore guilty.

He thinks that one or more UU ministers are behind this blog, and even though he has absolutely no proof of that, since the Board will not take action against us, then they are complicit and therefore guilty.

He continues to harp that Reverend Ray Drennan was verbally and psychologically abusive towards him, and therefore must be punished – even though he has been retired from active ministry for many, many years – and since the Board will not compel the UUA’s Ministerial Fellowship Committee to reopen the case simply because he demands it, then they are complicit and therefore guilty.

The list of “offenders” goes on and on – basically any UU who has the intelligence and fortitude to tell this man, ‘No, you cannot have your way simply because you believe you’re right about everything’ – and because the Board will not do as he demands (yes, he specifically told the Board in his latest communication that he demands that they act on his lengthy list of complaints) then they are just as guilty.

It’s like filing a lawsuit against your neighbor, and then when the judge determines there is no evidence and therefore no case, then you sue the judge for ‘complicity’ with the neighbor.  Worse, you sue anybody and everybody who had even the most remote association with the neighbor and the judge, all to bully them into giving you what you want.

One question, Mister Edgar – Are you even a member of any Unitarian Universalist congregation?  You could have joined the Lakeshore UU Congregation in the Montreal area, or the Church of the Larger Fellowship.  No?  So why do you keep complaining that the UUA, CUC and other UU bodies will not do as you say?  If you are not a member, then what standing do you have to demand such things of the Board?  Oh, that’s right – you were a member of the Unitarian Church of Montreal … until they got fed up with your disruptive, abusive and obsessive antics, and after suspending your membership twice, finally decided enough was enough and showed you the door.  And what have you done since then?  Picket in front of that door, and demand that anybody who might hear you join in your rage-filled drive for ‘justice’.

All of this was based because, as you say, the former minister of the Montreal church alleged that you might be mentally ill.  So let’s put that to rest once and for all.  Go to a qualified and impartial psychiatrist, and let him or her evaluate you.  If, as you say, there is nothing to this allegation, then what are you afraid of?

Robin Edgar’s Obsessive Hatred of UU Ministers

Season’s Greetings to our readership! Now that we have had time to review the latest rants on ‘The Emerson Avenger’, our thoughts.

Robin Edgar has quite a bit of venom reserved for ordained UU ministers, what with his latest round of giving ‘virtual lumps of coal’ to his usual list of ‘suspect’ ministers. Worse, as is typical with his being so very stuck in the past, his complaints are years old. Even Old Saint Nick is more forgiving, as he only gives you coal if you have been ‘naughty’ during the past year.

Reverend Cynthia Cain is the recipient of his wrath for a blog post about US Republican Party screeds which she wrote in September of 2008. Anybody with common sense reading this can figure out she is opining about the lack of civility amongst leading GOP figures during that election year. Unfortunately, Robin Edgar is incapable of thinking beyond a simplistic ‘all-or-nothing’ mindset, so he sees criticism of the actions of some as condemnation of all, which in his mind amounts to ‘Big Fat U*U hypocrisy’ – a crime which, keeping with his histrionic approach, can never be forgiven, and must always be avenged punished.

Reverend Victoria Weinstein has received particular attention on ‘The Emerson Avenger’, especially for a post from March of 2006 in which she lashed out against a US Senator with admittedly tasteless remarks.  Then she took the blog post down.  Not good enough for Robin Edgar, who deems that he shall haunt her with obsessively repetitive posts about this for years to come – literally!

Reverend John Buhrens in our opinion should consider his ‘lump of coal’ a badge of honour.  Robin Edgar bestowed it upon him for his letter from – get this, friends – May of 1996, in which the then President of the UUA rightly criticizes Mister Edgar for trying to use the Candles of Joy and Concerns as a platform for lashing out at the Unitarian Church of Montreal and their minister, and then attempting to pass out yet more copies of his incredibly lengthy letter of complaint.  Reverend Buhrens, if you are reading this, we salute you.  Please feel free to use Robin Edgar’s dubious ‘gift’ to keep yourself warm.

Last but not least, Robin Edgar once again rehashes his allegations that Reverend Ray Drennan, now long since retired, labelled him a psychotic. Well, whether Reverend Drennan or anybody else at the Unitarian Church of Montreal called you crazy, Mister Edgar, we would think that the least appropriate response would be to behave in such a manner as to confirm such an accusation. Instead, you have not only behaved in such a fixated and inappropriate manner lo these many years, but by your own admission you have done so in order to deliberately offend and irritate people. Is it that you are so desperate for attention, Mister Edgar, or that you have no idea of how to behave in such circumstances? Either way, if anybody is deserving of lumps of coal, it is the self-confessed ‘not-nice’ author of ‘The Emerson Avenger’ blog, for his immature and outrageous conduct year after year after year.

What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?

We have so frequently heard Robin Edgar’s account of what happened at the Unitarian Church of Montreal, both from him and from UCM members who have posted the church’s official response here.  Now we have received the following:

“Robin Edgar keeps saying this all started when Ray Drennan dismissed his claims of revelation as ‘psychotic’.  Not true!  It began well before that.  You are right that Robin was attempting to use office materials and equipment without church permission, and that he lost control when told that he could not.  He even threw a chair, frightening one of the staff members.  It was after this and other incidents that Reverend Ray Drennan decided to meet privately with Robin, to share the concerns of UCM staff and members.  After this meeting, Robin began to target Ray Drennan with accusations of misconduct, claiming that he would not listen to him and so on.  When the church did not respond as he wanted, then he escalated his actions, and the rest is history.”

We should note that we have no way of corroborating these details, short of other witnesses at UCM concurring.  As for the meeting between Robin Edgar and Ray Drennan, unless one of them actually recorded this conversation, we cannot know for sure what exactly transpired between them.

But, consider the pattern of Robin Edgar’s online behaviour.  He is careful to omit mention of incidents which would cast him in a negative light, supporting the concerns mentioned by those against whom he so frequently lashes out.  Then, when somebody else brings such incidents to light, he will either deny them as “Big Fat U*U BS”, or he will rationalize his behaviour on the grounds that, since he believes UUs treated him badly, then his offensive reactions are somehow “legitimate.”

For years, Robin Edgar has tried to portray himself as the victim of a witch-hunt, denying that his outrageous and even threatening behaviour has anything to do with his being expelled from UCM, or with the drawn-out course of events which has since followed.  He keeps tracing this back to Ray Drennan’s alleged misconduct.  Now we are given reason to believe that Reverend Drennan was in fact attempting to address an existing conflict, and the concerns of church staff and members, in his pastoral capacity.  Perhaps he was trying to share how others viewed Robin as a consequence of his behaviour.  Perhaps he was provoked into an angry confrontation, as Robin has done with others (and, of course, then blames on the other person).

We cannot say with certainty.  Even if Reverend Drennan were to share his account of that meeting, all we would then have are two conflicting testimonies.  But, as we have said before, there is other evidence to consider, and that is how Robin Edgar has treated others, and how he refuses to admit that he has, or can ever do, anything wrong.