As a reluctant member of the Anglican
Soviet Communion, I’ve been embarrassed more than once by the leaders of the hierarchy. The Most Rev. Dr. Katharine Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, and the Most Rev. and Rt. Hon. Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, have given me ample reason over the last few years to wince and turn my head away. If it weren’t for the muscular evangelical version of Christianity that prevails in Africa and Asia, there would be no hope left for Anglicanism.
But Dr. Williams has hit a new low today. He has, in effect, announced the full dhimmitude of the Church of England:
Adoption of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is ‘unavoidable’, says Archbishop of Canterbury
The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is “unavoidable” and that it would help maintain social cohesion.
Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4’s World At One that the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.
He says that Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.
He says Muslims should not have to choose between “the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty”.
Dr Williams said there was a place for finding a “constructive accommodation” in areas such as marriage — allowing Muslim women to avoid Western divorce proceedings.
Other religions enjoyed such tolerance of their own laws, he pointed out, but stressed that it could never be allowed to take precedence over an individual’s rights as a citizen.
“Other religions”? Which other religions, specifically? The Shia Muslims in the holy city of Qom? How about the Sunnis in Mecca?
He said it would also require a change in perception of what Sharia involved beyond the “inhumanity” of extreme punishments and attitudes to women seen in some Islamic states.
“Change of perception”, eh? Do you mean we should ignore the embarrassing details, and concentrate on the big picture? And the big picture consists of… what? The overall record of humane, tolerant, peaceful, and benevolent behavior by Muslims the world over throughout history, right?
– – – – – – – – –
Dr Williams said: “It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system.
“We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances.”
Yes, we have. The enlightened British government did just that a few days ago, when it effectively legalized polygamy for persons of the Muslim persuasion.
Polygamy! They didn’t like it when the Mormons practiced it, did they? That was barbaric, but this… Well, this is multicultural.
He added: “There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law.
“It would be quite wrong to say that we could ever license a system of law for some community which gave people no right of appeal, no way of exercising the rights that are guaranteed to them as citizens in general.
“But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them.
“In some cultural and religious settings, they would seem more appropriate.”
Oh yes, those other ways of looking at divorce. Talaq, talaq, talaq!
There’s more, much more, in the article. Read it and weep.
I’ve said repeatedly that things have to get worse before they can get better. And they do; they just keep getting worse and worse.
I’m still waiting for the last clause of that sentence to kick in.
Hat tip: Cimmerian.