Comments: the views of Bishop Nazir-Ali

Fair enough. Its true that the veil isnt wholesale mandatory in most Islamic countries. I think its reasonable to ask to allow it and to ask for it to be removed.
Michael Nazir[-Ali]'s comments in the summer were really spot on.

Posted by DaveW at Monday, 13 November 2006 at 10:38am GMT

Dave, here and in another comment I have corrected the bishop's surname.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento at Monday, 13 November 2006 at 1:09pm GMT

Simon,
Thank you

Posted by DaveW at Monday, 13 November 2006 at 1:45pm GMT

As I remember Pakistan's “return to Islam” was inspired by those who resented the “secularist” agenda that had brought new freedoms to the people there.
I am not quite sure how the argument runs from there …….. perhaps I would have asked the bishop different questions.
The analysis of how British mosques have changed over the years is also interesting.
It seems they were once peaceful places where people learned Arabic and the Koran and then fundamentalists from abroad suddenly changed their agenda.
The Church of England should take a stern warning from this.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Tuesday, 14 November 2006 at 12:58pm GMT

I am all for Christian fundamentalists from outside in the CofE, lets have some Mother Theresas and Billy Grahams.

Posted by DaveW at Tuesday, 14 November 2006 at 2:05pm GMT

Pity there seems to have been an attempted takeover from fundamentalists here!

I tend to think Nazir-Ali speaks with the rather typical voice of the convert - he appears to have something of a siege mentality

Posted by Merseymike at Tuesday, 14 November 2006 at 10:25pm GMT

"I am all for Christian fundamentalists from outside in the CofE, lets have some Mother Theresa"

Umm, I think the late saint might not entirely enjoy a 'fundamentalist' tag.... Obediently traditional RC, her attitude to Authority and Scripture wouldn't have commended itself to Reform, would it?

Personally I'd settle for a few more Michael Ramseys (fd. 14 Nov)

Posted by mynsterpreost at Tuesday, 14 November 2006 at 10:49pm GMT

>It seems they were once peaceful places where people learned Arabic and the Koran and then fundamentalists from abroad suddenly changed their agenda.
The Church of England should take a stern warning from this.<

Quite: especially Wahabi Islam from Saudi Arabia and impact on Pakistani Madrassas. One can imagine the intention of abroad, and approaches intending to radicalise (in the theological-political sense) Christians. Entryism, it is called. It can come from the south in Anglicanism, or the north in some Protestantism.

For outsiders it is a private grief of conflicts of believing and communion, but should any of these entryists want to bring about the last days by pushing history forward, encouraging God to act, then Christianity will have just the problem as from Islam. There are plenty of world wide disputes via which to bring in Armageddon.

Posted by Pluralist at Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 2:55am GMT

The more I scan this piece by Dominic Lawson – the poorer it reads.

It begins with the claim that Nazir-Ali was a contender for Canterbury and implies his chances were destroyed by a liberal plot of lies.
As I recall, Nazir-Ali did think he was a contender and (unusually and uniquely) mounted something akin to a campaign – but I hear he was never actually in the running.

I vaguely remember a couple of un-attributed stories about his age etc appeared in a few columns – but I would be interested to know if there was anything like a concerted campaign to discredit him. Does anyone have any information?
I know he thinks there was and claims as much. The body language as Rowan embraced him at his installation in Canterbury was interesting.

Lawson fails to follow-up the obvious contradictions in Nazir-Ali views because it would get in the way of his attempt to hail this Prince of the Church as the “King We Never Had”. On the other hand many are already dismissing Rowan Williams with the cutting words Tacitus used about the Emperor Galba:

" omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset ".

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 10:42am GMT

There's also a question over just how traditional Mother Teresa actually was,

She was certainly a universalist and believed that all religions lead to God, and that all should follow their own faith - she never made any attempt to convert those of other beliefs and as she once said, she was happy for Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims and Catholics to pray together to the God she believed they all followed

Posted by Merseymike at Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 6:53pm GMT

Dear Merseymike,
If the fundamentalists are Michael Nazir-Ali then thats good isnt it. My point is not the label but what the label is associated with; otherwise labelling is imo more of a demonstration of an ‘us and them’ siege mentality .

The other point about Mother Teresa was that she wasn’t a universalist. Everyone can know God, from His creation at the very least, but she followed Christ and believed in Christ, what she did she did for Jesus.
When I speak to Muslims for example I don’t have to tell them about God, they already believe in God, its the revelation of God through Jesus Christ I find they don’t know.

Posted by DaveW at Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 11:15pm GMT

"My point is not the label but what the label is associated with; otherwise labelling is imo more of a demonstration of an ‘us and them’ siege mentality"

DaveW,
We disagree so often, that I feel obliged to point out the times, like this one, where we do agree. It applies to things like fundamentalist and revisionist, and even conservative and liberal too.

Posted by Ford Elms at Thursday, 16 November 2006 at 12:35pm GMT

Actually, Mother Teresa was clearly a universalist Christian. Its not a position unique to her within Catholic theology. Of course she followed Jesus, but she also believed that the followers of other faiths followed God as well

There is so much evidence for that, I suggest you do some research. Its actually why some American conservative evangelicals dislike her so much.

Posted by Merseymike at Friday, 17 November 2006 at 9:54am GMT

>...already dismissing Rowan Williams with the cutting words Tacitus used about the Emperor Galba:

" omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset ".<

Go to Wikipedia for these lines and it says:

He was born as Servius Sulpicius Galba near Terracina, "on the left as you go towards Fundi" in the words of Suetonius. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galba

On the left as you go towards fundy?? Fundamentalism?

Posted by Pluralist at Saturday, 18 November 2006 at 2:44am GMT

I don't think it was Bishop Nazir-Ali's place to say whether muslim women should wear the veil or not. I wouldn't tell him not to wear his purple gown. However for security reasons I am sure no muslim woman would mind lifting her veil. Nuns cover their hair and many religious Christian women did in in earlier times. Christian brides cover their faces in church as do widows. As the origin of our religions is the same i.e from God there is much in common, thank God.

Posted by Dr M Sami at Monday, 8 January 2007 at 9:26pm GMT

Just read a BBC article re: Bishop Nazir-Ali's speech (?) comments on Britain facing a 'moral vacuum'. I fully agree, but then I have been making much the same argument for at least 10 years. How has it come to pass that public figures are only now beginning to wake up to the dangers of multi-culturalism, mass, uncontrolled immigration and the liberal-left's deliberate destruction of a Christian, unified Britain? I have to say that the Anglican church has been complicit in the disintegration and it is only a matter of time before it apologises itself out of existence. I was raised a Catholic and began trying to 'rediscover' my faith some years ago. I went to some Anglican services, particlualry Evensong. I soon realised however that the wishy-washy liberalism of the Anglican church rendered its services little more than amusement for tourists.

Posted by Richard L at Wednesday, 28 May 2008 at 2:33pm BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.