I was astonished that a person in the Archbishop's position could be so naiive about the implications of what he said. I also fail to see how establishing a parallel system, in which sharia would be a possible alternative to English or Scottish law, could possibly help vulnerable members of the Muslim community to whom the law as it stands already gives too little protection in practice. If he wasn't saying this what was he saying? If sharia courts, like Beth Din, work entirely in the framework of British laws, then no special arrangement would be necessary, not would the speech. Incidentally, was it really necessary for the Archbishop to fuel resentment by implying that Jews have priveliges that Muslims do not (especially as this does not appear to be true)? Finally, how on earth did he think this speech would be received by Christians, including Anglicans, who are suffering in Africa and the Middle East, from those who would impose sharia. He should go, now.

Kirkland, West Midlands, UK

Rod of Chichester said:
'His speech (Dr Williams') was not aimed at people who cannot follow an intellectual arguement/exposition (sic). It was delivered to lawyers.'

We are all no doubt deeply indebted to Rod for pointing this out to us, especially the cerebrally-challenged, ordinary, non-intellectual, non-lawyers of this country, myself included. I hadn't realised that having waded through his speech (and I do mean waded), that I shouldn't have read it after all, not being a lawyer.

Of course, not being able to understand the contents, I had to accept that Dr Williams, learned and devout man that he is, must surely have his finger on the pulse of the nation and has our best interests at heart.

I did, however, find myself wondering how anyone could stretch four paragraphs of utter drivel into four pages of doublespeak. George Orwell would surely have been elated!

Phil, Wolverhampton, UK

Sharia law working within English law.... So can we look forward to beheadings and floggings in Trafalgar Square? If not, could the head of the Anglican church clarify what parts of his vision are acceptable? Does he make himself aware of real events in the world?

J Holland, Toronto,

His speech was not aimed at people who cannot follow an intellectual arguement/exposition. It was delivered to lawyers.
The arrogance I would suggest is not his but those journalists and commentators who decided to take the lecture out of the context of a lecture to lawyers and then reduced the complicated arguements to a soundbite that was not representative of the the lecture. It is the journalists and commentators who are arrogant and serve sales of papers (and thus scandal and polemic) rather than reasoned debate.

Rod, Chichester, UK

Edd from London. I have been won over by your exquisite reasoning and intellectual brilliance. I am now converted.

sam davis, Bristol, UK

Sam from Bristol. I think you embarrass yourself with your own ignorence.

Edd, London,

Surely if the Archbishop is a devout Christian he should be evangelising the heathens and saving souls not trying to accommodate alien religions to the disadvantage of Christians and Christianities primacy in England. Does he not believe in Jesus' word and eternal damnation or salvation?

Neil McAllister, Chessington, Surrey

Sorry, am I missing something here? If Dr Williams is such a great intellect then why does he believe in an imaginary concept like God, miracles and the immaculate conception? Why doesn't he have the intelligence to question this sort of mumbo-jumbo?

He is also supposed to represent everyone in the Anglican Church. If he has alienated 99% of them then he clearly doesn't and should pack his bags and go and live in a monastery where he can keep his thoughts to himself.

Sam Davis, Bristol, UK

Our best media correspondent has hit the nail on the head, this intellectual failure to accept criticism, from a range of opinion from the most acute commentators down to the Sun's 'What a burkha'. I hope ABC is not just going to say that all the world has not been clever enough to understand him.
That is a sort of infallibilitst doctrine.
Peter repented after the cock crew thrice, alas ABC must face his moment to admit crass error, obfuscation, and as Ruth Gledhill says, 'arrogance'.

Yaya, Dalston, UK

What is the point of a leader who cannot express himself in a manner whereby the majority of the people he is supposed to be leading, and those he might aspire to lead, can understand.

King James I (VI of Scotland) was called 'The wisest fool in Christendom.' His actions led to a group of renegade Catholics trying to bomb Parliament and kill him. It seems in Archbishop Carey that we have a new candidate for 'The wisest fool in Christendom.' Someone so arrogant in his own intellectual superiority that he cannot see the impact he will have on 'ordinary' people.

Let's hope it doesn't result in a similar outcome.

As for Sharia law being used in marital/divorce cases .... those are precisely the areas where women are actively discriminated against in Islam. It is in their domestic lives that they have no power and their menfolk dictate who they may marry, how they live their lives and (more frequently than we probably know) when they should die and who will do the killing.

Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey

How many people have actually read and understood precisely what Williams said? I suspect very few.
It's sad that people are so ready to castigate and vilify on the basis of some hackneyed,exploitative media version of what they think Williams may have said .
It's the manipulating ,spinning is sinning British media that needs to be controlled.

adrian, Jakarta, Indonesia

When you see that non-Muslims are not even allowed into Mecca and Medina, you know how intolerant the faith is towards non-believers. So many aspects of Sharia Law are antiquated and incompatible with modern day living and it just seem grotesque that a person of high office in the Church should have such a jaundiced view of the issues.

Henry Y, Singapore, Singapore

You mention Buckingham Palace. I wonder if the Archbishop's reluctance to take presentational advice on this deeply controversial subject stems in part from the response to 'inclusive' pronouncements made by Prince Charles a few years ago. When the Prince of Wales averred that one day he would wish to be 'Defender of Faiths', it might not have been greeted with widespread enthusiasm, but it did not cause the same sort of furore.

Nigel Grimshaw, Cambridge,

The archbishop would do well to read Proverbs 16:18, perhaps for the first time. "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

As a retired former academic who first had a "real" life, I can well attest to the arrogance of academe. Those who possess a great bit of narrowly defined knowledge too often assume their intellect places them above all others in all matters.

Bob Evans, Anaheim, California

‘’It is an arrogance that affords no credibility or respect to the popular voice.’’

One cannot believe that a religious head can have a false air of superiority. Will such people have much respect?

Dr. Williams is out of time and out of tune with the times. It appears that he does not have a vision and nor can he provide one!

If Britain is permitting Sharia laws in some Muslim areas, then Rev Dr. Nazir Ali is right about the existence of no-go areas. Dr. Williams will make these no-go zones into mini-states! Does he, society and Britain want it?

At least some legal experts should have condemned Dr. Williams advocating seventh century some desert laws in the 21st century in Britain!

Time for all sane to speak up and condemn the insane comments and their advocates right away!
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

Their is no way around it as their is no way around islam. This bishop is incompatible with christiany interests as islam is incompatible with out culture, our society and our country. Both must go.

Fabio C, London, UK

percussins of his statement must have been particularly felt reckless around the world in countries like Turkey where combating undesirable afects fundementalism blured with daily politics

F Tekin, Sussex,

The trouble with pure academics is they no more and more about less and less.

sk, East Sussex,

A couple of years ago a 16-yer old girl was publicly hanged in Tehran. under their law. Did the Archbishop have any thoughts on the matter that could be made known to the perpetrators of that vile act. Why didn't he speak out then?

Jean Abbey, Sydney NSW, Australia

He should have sufficient respect for his staff to listen to their advice, or he should not be entitled to have staff. It really is that simple.

John, Winchester,