Sunday, 28 March 2004

Carey and Islam continued

The BBC had a radio interview: Listen with Real Audio.

Carey and the clash of civilisations
Were Dr. Carey’s criticisms of Islam valid, and should he have made them? Talking to Brian Baron the following day, Lord. Carey said his remarks had been taken out of context and called the criticism “simplistic”.
Interview with Lord Carey, and discussion with Patrick Sokdeo, Director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity and by Sahid Bleher, General secretary of the Islamic Party of Britain.

Meanwhile, the Sunday Times columnist Atticus had this:

Atticus: Kilroy Carey makes up with Muslims by upsetting gays.
George Carey, the Church of England’s answer to Robert Kilroy-Silk, has obviously not lost the incisive diplomatic skills for which he was renowned while Archbishop of Canterbury. Trying to smooth over the row about his remarks on the Muslim world, he has reopened the argument that is most bitterly dividing Anglicans, that of homosexual priests.
The former archbishop, waded in with his ecclesiastical hobnailed boots while telling Gavin Esler, on Newsnight, of the dialogue he has had with the Islamic world.
“Muslim leaders are not afraid to talk to me about western excesses,” said Carey. “They have expressed their great condemnation of practising homosexuality in the church, particularly in the United States. I hear those criticisms. They are rightly made.”
In an echo of the newspaper article that lost Kilroy-Silk his job, Carey said in a lecture earlier last week that Islamic culture was authoritarian and had contributed little to world culture for 500 years.
He insists: “I’m a friend of Muslims. I know many of them by name.”
Perhaps, but they probably won’t be inviting him round to celebrate the end of Ramadan.

And the Sunday Telegraph had this editorial comment: Leap of faith

Lord Carey’s speech revealed that he is after all a man of strong views, many of which he evidently suppressed when Archbishop of Canterbury. The question remains, however: why was he so paralysed by caution when actually in the job that would have allowed him to make a difference?

In the Independent, columnist Henry Porter wrote What God condones this?. Worth a read.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Sunday, 28 March 2004 at 1:45 PM GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: News