A massive clerical error
Matthew d'Ancona 1:44am
For once, the devil does not lie in the detail. The real problem with the sharia row triggered by the Archbishop of Canterbury is not legalistic, but that it should be happening at all. What on earth possessed the most senior Christian churchman in the land to suggest what he did in the first place? Since when is the function of the established Church to recommend an accommodation with the tenets of imported theocracy?
The Archbishop's primary role, one assumes, is to care for the souls of his own dwindling flock. Instead, poor Dr Williams gets his surplice in a twist, proposing with the garbled logic of which only a true academic is capable that part of the answer to the dual allegiance felt by British Muslims might be to recognise certain aspects of sharia law. It is a relief to learn that the Archbishop is not recommending public executions in Brick Lane or the cutting off of thieves' hands in Burnley. But his proposal is still intellectually contemptible and socially dangerous. It is a counsel of despair masquerading as feel-good ecumenism.
Yes, many British Muslims have dual loyalties. In the era of globalisation and population mobility, this is common enough, as identities pile up within individuals. British Catholics have long confronted (successfully) the question of distinct allegiance to Crown and to Rome. Likewise, British Jews are perfectly capable of identifying passionately with the state of Israel but being, first and foremost, citizens of this country. Our islands teem with new Britons who have complex emotions about their new home and where they have come from.
At a time of doubt, all the more reason for clear guard-rails, at least where public obligation is concerned. The cement of our ever more pluralist, diverse society is the law: our equality under the law is the most meaningful form of equality that we have. Indeed, the law is the best guarantee that ethnic minorities and immigrant communities have of fair treatment.
It is spectacularly wrong headed of Dr Williams to argue for more fragmentation - customised legal systems for different groups - rather than the legal uniformity that allows religious diversity to flourish and acts as a firewall against discrimination.
The Archbishop advances the jurisprudence of appeasement, an example of liberalism defeating itself by kowtowing to fundamentalism. The very last thing this country needs to add to its many stresses and dysfunctions is the establishment of legal ghettoes.
Previous
sebastian
February 8th, 2008 4:13am Report this commentThis, to me, is the equivalent of saying that since many Nazis were actually quite nice and some of that much misunderstood Fascist creed was fairly sensible and not entirely unreasonable, we should, for the sake of social equality and harmony, permit elements of it wherever there's a vibrant Nazi cultural community and a "moderate", say, Assembly of British Nazis to hold chummy interfaith dialogue with. Rowan Williams should have a chat with the modern Germans some time.
Laurie
February 8th, 2008 7:53am Report this commentReligion makes no sense. It may have some emotional value, it may even have been handy in our cultural evolution but these comments only serve to further highlight its fundamental absurdity. Clerical error? No just another example in the long tradition of clerical nonsense.
Jonny Mac
February 8th, 2008 9:33am Report this commentThis is the clearest comment I've read on this startling suggestion. I would only add (with my lawyer's hat on) that it is extraordinarily misconceived legally - but I agree that is a secondary consideration. Williams a fantastic example of how being clever doesn't give you common sense.
Maggie
February 8th, 2008 10:17am Report this commentThe Chief Rabbi spouts utter bilge on a daily basis and he has been rewarded with the post of adviser and confident to Gordon Brown. I'm starting to to get a bit suspicious about the lengths some people are going to to silence the Archbishop even though I'd prefer him n ot to have said it.
mike
February 8th, 2008 10:40am Report this commentAny grown man who believes in a god should not be taken seriously.
Nicholas Millman
February 8th, 2008 11:23am Report this commentTime for the old lefty hippie to resign. mike, I agree - any grown man who believes in a god should not be taken seriously. However, any grown man who believes in God should be taken very seriously indeed, especially in this Christian country under atheist and infidel threat.
David
February 8th, 2008 1:38pm Report this commentI feel deep despair. Not at what Rowan Williams said but the reaction to it. I tried to engage people at work today on the subject and they frankly didn't want to know. They based their views on what the media had told them, and they weren't interested in exploring what the Archbishop had actually said. Worse, they made assumptions about me, simply for trying to discuss the issue in a constructive way. The destructive soundbite approach adopted to this and all complex issues by the media is to blame.
Faceless Bureaucrat
February 8th, 2008 1:40pm Report this commentDr. Rowan 'Atkinson' Williams has certainly flipped his lid this time. Did someone say "Will no-one rid me of this turbulent Priest?"...
Simon
February 8th, 2008 1:54pm Report this commentIf there ever was a reason to disestablish the Church of England it is Rowan Williams comments. If we unwound this medieval anachronism then it might deprive this priest the lifeblood of publicity as he would be at the same level of other clerics.
Jed Yoong
February 8th, 2008 2:03pm Report this commentYou guys should take a look at Malaysia. We "gave in" to Syariah Courts. Now, we have a dual court system. Non-Muslims are being denied their rights in civil courts and ordered to seek redress in Syariah Courts. We said, "But Sir, we aren't Muslims and don't believe in Islam. So how can we be judged in your courts?" Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/2uv426
Maggie
February 8th, 2008 2:11pm Report this commentI agree with Simon. Clerics should receive parity of abuse and not be allowed to stifle debate by making bogus accusations of anti-semitism or islamophobia.
dave, surrey
February 8th, 2008 3:31pm Report this commentis Rowan Williams a nulabour cabbage.? I can't help thinking with the coverage this story achieved this morning, are labour trying to bury bad news. Wendy Alexander.. What GB's lawyer said in court regarding party manifesos.. I dunno.. Everytime there's blanket coverage of something I instinctively look for the smaller stories.
TGF UKIP
February 8th, 2008 4:36pm Report this commentThe guy who summarised this clown to a 'T' was Jeremy Clarkson on 30 Dec in the S. Times in a piece titled "Unhand my patio heater, archbishop" Williams had been spouting the usual lefty green drivel and equating driving and flying with sin. Our Jeremy, though, had his number exactly - "This is a man who was arrested in the anti-nuclear protests of the 1980s. Who refused to call the 9/11 terrorists evil and said they had serious moral goals. Who thinks that everything bought and sold is "an act of aggression" on the developing world. Who campaigns for gay rights but wouldn't actually appoint a homosexual as a bishop. And who recently said in an interview that America was the bad guy and that muslims in Britain were like good samaritans. In other words he's a full on five-star, paid-up member of the loony left."
David Lindsay
February 8th, 2008 5:10pm Report this commentDr Williams has forfeited his moral right to his particular ex officio seat in Parliament. He should resign and, if he wishes to promote the adoption of Sharia Law within the parliamentary process, seek election to the House of Commons on that basis. As a Tory. After all, it is the Tories who are affiliated to the European People's Party, as is Turkey's ruling AKP, the leaders of which are in no sense "former Islamists" and would not have been elected if they were. And the Tories' vehicles toured Ealing Southall proclaiming in various South Asian languages that Muslim, Hindu and Sikh festivals were to be made public holidays by the Tories. Then that party's "Quality of Life Commission" (don't laugh, it's real) published a report advocating that "local communities" be given the power to designate three public holidays in their respective localities. In other words, the Tories are going to go around Asian areas at the next Election making this same promise all over again, adjusted according to how Muslim, Hindu or Sikh the particular constituency, ward or addressee happens to be. And it looks as if Labour might do the same. (The Lib Dems have doubtless been doing this sort of thing for years, because they will say absolutely anything according to how this or that the particular constituency, ward or addressee happens to be.) After this, what else are these unspecified "local communities" going to decide? Who are they, exactly? I think we all know that they are the great and the good of the local mosque, mandir or gurdwara. Getting to decide this, and then a whole lot more, is to be their price for getting out the vote, sometimes consisting of nothing more than reminding their mates to fill in postal ballot papers the right way on behalf of their entire households. These situations will easily perpetuate themselves, since people will move - not just from around the country, but from around the world - to live in these little Caliphates, Hindutvas and Khalistans.
Travis Bickle
February 8th, 2008 5:25pm Report this commentDavid (1:38) where does one start? Forget this "it's the media's fault" drivel, every time anyone seen to be high profile or part of the establishment says anything at all that might give succour to these people they know their tactics are working and they will step up their campaign to change our society to suit their ends. That is why this fool speaking out of turn is so repulsive to most people, and I'm not surprised your workmates made their excuses and left. Genuinely sorry for your despair though.
TGF UKIP
February 8th, 2008 7:11pm Report this commentAnother brilliant brilliant post David Lindsay demonstrating just how superficial and similar the three parties are. If there is a Christian God please may he help this benighted land.
Max Kaye
February 8th, 2008 7:47pm Report this commentAll religions are stupid, wrong and corrupting, but some are more stupid, wrong and corrupting than others.
william j
February 9th, 2008 7:25pm Report this commentRowan Williams, with a freshly hennaed beard, today welcomed the opportunity for interfaith dialogue with the unveiling of a minaret adjacent to St Paul's cathedral. "This fine domed building should, in a multi-faith society, have multiple uses - promoting community cohesion" said Williams.
Ian H
February 10th, 2008 10:48am Report this commentPersonally, I have no time for Williams. He is a typical Blairite appointee - shallow, ignorant and a dedicated self-publicist. And yet, I can't help feeling that much of the howl of indignation from the whole media/political establishment is partly to cover up their own inadequacy in dealing with this issue over many years. They have hidden behind a facile multiculturalism and any attempt to discuss the problems arising from mass immigration has been shouted down as racism. Williams has a point - one of the logical conclusions of a multicultural society is a plurality of laws and legal customs. What he has inadvertently done is to point up the wrongheadedness of the whole multicultural ethos, which is why the political classes are so very annoyed with him - he's blown the gaff.
Back to top