News blog: has he been misunderstood?

The Prime Minister today spoke out strongly in defence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, a short time before Dr Rowan Williams attempts to justify to the General Synod of the Church of England his controversial remarks on Islamic law .

Gordon Brown's spokesman said that the PM and the Archbishop had a strong relationship and stayed in close touch.

“The Prime Minister believes the Archbishop of Canterbury is a man of great integrity and dedication to public and community services, and he understands the difficulty he is facing at the moment," said the spokesman.

Multimedia

• Video Q&A with Archbishop of Canterbury about Sharia

• Churchgoers react to Archbishop's comments

• Listen to the Archbishop's speech on Islam

Intellectual arrogance pervades heart of wisdom

Dr Williams was advised before his speech that the content could prove controversial. He should have listened to that advice

BACKGROUND

• St Rowan seeks forgiveness for the sin of ‘unclarity’

• Prime Minister gives his backing to Archbishop

• Archbishop faces critics on day of judgment

• Sympathy and anger as faithful judge leader

• Row over gay clergy threatens to divide Church

BACKGROUND

• John Donne's pulpit

• The Archbishop of Canterbury and Sharia

• My brush with Sharia was swift and fair

• Surprise at sheer fury of attacks on Williams

I've read it so you don't have to

The Archbishop of Canterbury meant well and was quite aware of some of the objections

BACKGROUND

• Adopt Sharia in UK for Muslims, says Archbishop

• Archbishop urged to resign over Sharia row

• Full text of Archbishop's lecture

• From Leyton to Dewsbury, Sharia courts are already settling disputes

"The Archbishop has been clarifying and setting in a wider context the comments he has made and I’m sure he will continue to do so in the future.”

The spokesman added however: “The Prime Minister is very clear that British laws must be based on British values, and that religious law, while respecting other cultures, should be subservient to British criminal and civil law."

Dr WIlliams has enraged many and given fuel to his enemies by appearing to advocate in a speech last week that parts of Sharia, or Islamic law, should be incorporated into English law. The comments have brought frank criticisms and calls for his resignation from within the Church of England.

Early indications at Church House, Westminster, where Dr Williams will take to the rostrum at 3pm to deliver his presidential address, were however that Synod members intended to rally around their beleaguered leader. He is likely to get a standing ovation as he emerges into the public forum after three days of blistering attack and comment.

But behind the scenes, clergy and laity will be demanding to know how the Archbishop could have landed himself and the Church in such a position.

Dr Williams in his speech referred to "supplementary jurisdiction" in a way that made it appear he advocated it, and earlier on Thursday said in a BBC interview that he believed Sharia in Britain "seems unavoidable". Alison Ruoff, a Synod member who has already said she would like to see Dr Williams resign and go back to academia, told GMTV that what had happened was incredibly sad. She said: “I think what the Archbishop has said has led an enormous number of people to be very worried, to be upset.

"As a Christian leader, people simply don’t understand where he is coming from. Yes, you extend the hand of friendship to all, and that includes Muslims, of course, but you don’t actually think about embracing part of their Sharia law or even suggesting it.

“There are Christians overseas in Islamic countries who cannot believe that their Archbishop, who is not only head of the Church of England but of the Anglican Communion, has said such a thing when they are suffering from massive persecution in Islamic countries.”

Dr Williams, who had intended to talk about Zimbabwe in his 30-minute address to Synod, is prepared to improvise to clarify his position over the row.

Although some commentators are beginning to look behind the Archbishop's opaque speech at the issues he was attempting to address, rarely has a single archbishop united so many factions in criticism.

His predecessor Lord Carey wrote in the News of the World: “He has in my opinion overstated the case for accommodating Islamic legal codes. His conclusion that Britain will eventually have to concede some place in law for aspects of Sharia is a view I cannot share.”

But Lord Carey also defended the Archbishop, saying: “This is not a matter upon which Dr Williams should resign. He is a great leader in the Anglican tradition and he has a very important role to play in the Church.

“He has my full support. I telephoned him to say this to him and to tell him he is in my prayers. I understand he is horrified by what has happened.”

Ken Clarke, the Conservative former Chancellor, said of the Archbishop: “He’s just one of the most unworldly men I have ever met, together with being one of the most intelligent and plainly one of the most saintly and he has got himself into an absolutely classic British row and has angered a lot of people because they have all been persuaded that he has been talking about bringing back the stoning of women for various moral offences, and so on, which plainly he is just about the last person on earth to contemplate.”

Dr Williams has been backed by some Church figures. The Bishop of Hulme, the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, said he was appalled at the “knee-jerk” reaction to a serious piece of academic work.

The Rev Giles Fraser, vicar of Putney, told the BBC Radio 4 Sunday programme the media had descended on Dr Williams like a “pack of dogs”.

“I think the big issue here is the way the press has treated the Archbishop of Canterbury for raising a legitimate issue for him to raise.

“That is the big moral picture here. They have been a pack of dogs having a go at him without even trying to understand what he said.

“There is something sinister about a culture that judges first and tries to understand later.”