Sir, Whether one agrees with the Archbishop’s conclusions or not (“Archbishop argues for Islamic law in Britain”, Feb 8), his arguments are intelligent and subtle. The hysterical reaction is suggestive of the real menace to the cohesion of our society. Our obsession with “sending the right message” means that we do not take the time to engage in depth with those with whom we disagree.

Christians believe that our intelligence is a gift from God, which should embolden us to probe complex issues, and the Archbishop has shown real Christian leadership in daring to do so.

Father Timothy Radcliffe, OP
Blackfriars, Oxford

Sir, The potential harm done by Dr Williams’s utterances to the Christian Church in northern Nigeria, where Sharia has been imposed in recent years, is considerable.

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

One of your reports speaks of Dr Williams’s “nuanced and complex language”. Language is surely intended to allow us to communicate our thoughts with a reasonable degree of clarity: it is not intended — outside the University of Oxford — to be part of a game called “guess what I might be thinking”. A swift return to academia should be the Archbishop’s first priority.

Ian H. Lane
Torquay

Sir, How can your religion correspondent accuse the Archbishop of “hastily backtracking, claiming he had never called for a parallel jurisdiction of Sharia for Muslims” (Feb 9, page 1) when your legal editor quotes the Archbishop in responding to questions after the lecture: “I am not talking about parallel systems” and adds her own comment: “Dr Williams is not saying this” (page 7). Why bother with the truth when you can wind up a good story?

The Right Rev Keith Sinclair
Bishop of Birkenhead

Sir, I am still trying to digest the full text of the Archbishop’s lecture, but have so far discerned nothing which merits the hysterical headlines he has received. It may well be true that he was ill-advised to think aloud as he did. Yet it is equally true that if he were an entirely safe pair of hands, the Archbishop would be pilloried for being ineffectual or, more likely, ignored as irrelevant.

As it is, he has at least brought into the public realm issues that have been simmering under the surface which need to be acknowledged and debated openly. For that he deserves support, not approbation.

The Very Rev Charles Taylor
Dean of Peterborough

Sir, Has the Archbishop of Canterbury considered the pastoral implications of his pronouncement?

Explore Letters

• Feedback