Sunday, November 05, 2006

Bishop says Islam is about ‘victimhood and domination’.

The Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, has given an interview to The Times in which he exposes the inconsistency, schizophrenia and hypocrisy of many Muslims. He accuses them of double standards in their view of the world for propagating a ‘dual psychology’ in which they sought both ‘victimhood and domination’.

The bishop has previously poured scorn on the UK’s politically-correct multicultural agenda, and now states that Muslim demands can never be met because ‘their complaint often boils down to the position that it is always right to intervene when Muslims are victims... and always wrong when Muslims are the oppressors or terrorists’. He compared Bosnia and Kosovo, where he said Muslims were oppressed, with the powerful position of the Taleban in Afghanistan, who he said had been the oppressors. He added: ‘Given the world view that has given rise to such grievances, there can never be sufficient appeasement and new demands will continue to be made.’ In stating this, he articulates the precise strategy by which Islam is becoming the dominant, unchallenged faith of Western Europe.

He disagrees with the Archbishop of Canterbury, who seeks to create a multicultural, multi-faith United Kingdom in which all expressions of religion would be permitted, and leaders would be free to preach their message. Bishop Nazir-Ali directly confronts the failure to counter Islam’s politico-religiosity, which has permitted a radical Islam to flourish in Britain, spread by imported extremist imams who have no qualifications and, in many cases, do not even speak English. He articulates Cranmer's very thesis when he says: 'We are dealing with not just a faith, but with a well-defined political ideology.' He advocates rigorous checks to ensure that Muslim clerics are committed to the British way of life, cutting right across the zeitgeist of political correctness and accusations of bigotry or racism.

The Bishop of Rochester is one of the few serious figures in the Church of England who sincerely believes that British values have developed from the Christian faith and its vision of personal and common good. He states: ‘After they were clarified by the enlightenment they became the bedrock of our modern political life. These values need to be recovered to help us to inculcate the virtues of generosity, loyalty, moderation and love.’

Should not this man be Archbishop of Canterbury?


Blogger youdontknowme said...

and I thought the church had surrendered to the forces of multiculturalism.

well done to the bishop

5 November 2006 at 13:25  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

If you want a job doing well you have to employ a foreigner, it seems to have dawned on the Catholics maybe its about time the COE got up to speed.
I say kick out that sandal wearing worzel gummidge lookalike currently squatting in Lambeth Palace (probably a Labour voter) and give this little Indian bloke a go with the ball.

5 November 2006 at 16:33  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Worzel is a walking invitation for people to desert the CoE.At least,
Bishop Michael has been tireless in speaking out over the persecution of co-religionists in Muslim lands. He has applauded the work of Christian Solidarity International, a group which highlights the plight of Christians in non-Christian countries. Rowan Williams has chosen silence.
I also remember that in Feb. 2006 the General Synod voted to back a call from the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East for "morally responsible investment in the Palestinian occupied territories". Worzel backed divestment from companies that "support the occupation". He then immediately wrote to the Chief Rabbi regretting as "unfortunate" the Church of England's decision to review its investments in Israel.I shall not forgive him such a grievous lapse of judgement. The
former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey did not support the disinvestment move. He said he was "ashamed" to be an Anglican as a result of the Synod's decision. As was I. Nazir-Ali is my only remaining source of hope....

5 November 2006 at 17:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Should not this man be the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Well, he was considered - but vetoed by the Vatican apparently, because he is a convert from Catholicism. Of course, it is perfectly in order for the Vatican to have a say in appointing the head of the Protestant Church of England.

Our loss, I'm afraid.

5 November 2006 at 17:40  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Well, he was considered - but vetoed by the Vatican apparently..

Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Anonymous,

As reluctant as His Grace is to engage with anonymice, he would be deeply appreciative if you could adduce some evidence for this most interesting assertion.

5 November 2006 at 18:47  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Bugger Israel.
Why should anybody other than a jewish Zionist care ?

5 November 2006 at 19:47  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Perhaps Rowan W being a Christian Socialist appealed to Christian Socialist A C L Blair ?

5 November 2006 at 22:21  
Blogger kris said...

One can't help but note the deafening silence from the left.

Maybe the Bishop should start his own blog- perhaps

6 November 2006 at 09:22  
Blogger Rigger Mortice said...

'Should not this man be Archbishop of Canterbury?'


6 November 2006 at 11:15  
Anonymous vikki said...

"Should not this man be Archbishop of Canterbury?"

A resounding aye!!!

6 November 2006 at 12:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do we then recognise that we live less in danger from Islam than we do from the metropinko tendency that cossets it and treads on the indigenous population? So, yes, he should and other sensible men in other walks of public life.

6 November 2006 at 12:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can't get Henry II to make room for a new Archbishop

6 November 2006 at 15:59  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

No, no, no, no, no. You're all wrong.

He would be hopelessly compromised, and the role would force him to be political. This bishop speaks well from his present position - any higher, and he won't be the same man. He's a thorn in Williams' side. Thorns don't make the best leaders.

6 November 2006 at 15:59  
Anonymous Bob said...

Ulster Man - with all those "no"'s you're skirting dangerously close to a parody!

6 November 2006 at 18:28  
Anonymous Vol-in-Law said...

Nazir-Ali is a brave man. We need many more like him.

6 November 2006 at 20:54  
Anonymous kimberley quim said...

What I like about him is that his name is almost "Nazi"
Surely a good sign?

6 November 2006 at 21:21  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Ms Kimberley Quim,

Welcome to Cranmer's august blog.

His Grace seeks to inform you of the prerequisite for intelligent and erudite contributions. The banal and unintelligent belong elsewhere.


6 November 2006 at 21:50  
Blogger CityUnslicker said...

At least he was not interviewed like a few other bishops' (aka London & Liverppool) by the BBC yesterday spurting forth on the sins of the world we are all commiting by choosing tolive in a Western society (i.e. drive cards, get on planes etc). They drive away the masses even now.

By comparison, I am an Ali fan.

6 November 2006 at 22:20  
Anonymous religion of pieces said...

Muslims have in the last five years done more for Judeo-Christian unity than all the Popes, Archbishops, Rabbis, Pastors and theologians in the last 500 years.

Faced with the Muslim menace, the various branches of Judeo-Christianity are slowly realising that the values that unite them are vastly more important and more worth striving for than the insignificant details that divide them.

P.S. the atavistic Cardinal O'Brian is a disruptive influence in this respect, and should be promoted without delay to head of the Catholic Church in Pakistan, where his fondness for meddling in politics will no doubt attract even more interest than it does in Scotland.

6 November 2006 at 23:03  
Blogger Samuel Coates said...

CityUnslicker, you mean Bishop James Jones from Liverpool?

He's my favourite bishop by some way.

6 November 2006 at 23:13  
Anonymous Colin said...

Religion of pieces,

You wrote: "Muslims have in the last five years done more for Judeo-Christian unity than all the Popes, Archbishops, Rabbis, Pastors and theologians in the last 500 years."

But please don't forget the real danger of Catholicism, which has been identified and expressed so well by His Grace, e.g. in his posting of September 18, 2006:

"Allusions to secret gatherings of high-powered Roman Catholics are usually dismissed as the pastime of obsessive conspiracy theorists, but the admission is so barefaced it can scarcely be a plot in any covert sense at all. As the Vatican and Germany (along with Italy, Poland, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Ireland) continue to agitate for God and/or Christianity to feature in the Constitution for Europe, the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community (COMECE) has appointed a high-profile group to define the EU's ‘common values’, and to raise awareness of such values throughout the Union."

6 November 2006 at 23:28  
Anonymous Colin said...


has written for several publications providing balance on the issue of voting age. Highly recommended reading.
Nice to have you with us, Samuel.

6 November 2006 at 23:35  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Samuel Coates,

His Grace welcomes you to his august blog, and is immeasurably heartened that Mr Colin has preceded him by offering you the right hand of fellowship.

Bishop James Jones is indeed an impressive theologian, and His Grace shares his undoubted concern with the relevance and applicability of Scripture to Modernity and Postmodernity. It is rather like applying the traditional philosophy of Conservativism to a relativist era - one fraught with tension and contradiction.

7 November 2006 at 08:27  
Anonymous william norton said...

Cranmer: not my union, but from the outside I've often thought that Rochester was one of the few genuinely serious bishops in the C of E. It's all very hazy, but at the time I formed the impression that his candidacy for Canterbury had been knobbled by an inside team (can't recall the details; vague recollections of a regular slew of stories in the Sunday Telegraph etc) - perhaps you can enlighten us?

On your basic question: he may not be the Archbishop, but he appears to be acting like one. Athanasius contra mundam.

7 November 2006 at 09:30  
Blogger Man in a shed said...

Maybe your Grace should start a campaign to get Nazir as the new Arch Bishop ?

7 November 2006 at 10:13  
Blogger Cranmer said...

he may not be the Archbishop, but he appears to be acting like one.

Mr William Norton,

His Grace corroborates this, and has sympathy for Mr Ulster Man's opinion that, were he to be appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, he may cease to act like one.

His Grace is trying to uncover evidence of a 'knobbled' candidacy, to which an anonymous contributor has alluded, and is most anxious to discover whether a convert from the Catholic Church was considered unsuitable for that reason.

Mr Man in a Shed,

There is little point instigating such a campaign when the man with authority to make the appointments is a crypto-Catholic.

7 November 2006 at 11:01  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Maybe your Grace should start a campaign to get Nazir as the new Arch Bishop ?

The C of E alternates Primates between Evangelicals (Carey) and Anglo-Catholics (Williams) so Nazir-Ali would definitely have been one of the other candidates who was displaced by Williams who was not even a member of the C of E.

Rowan Williams role as A of C is to bury the Anglican communion at the 2008 Lambeth Conference - then he can retire to well-earned oblivion

7 November 2006 at 11:53  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

Carey? Evangelical? Give me a break. He's presently engaged in promoting a multi-faith coronation, and did more to erode the foundations of Protestant witness in the UK than any archbishop since the war. And as for 'no, no, no,' being a pardody, I never said 'No surrender'!

7 November 2006 at 12:55  
Anonymous Bob said...

I was speaking in jest, and hope I didn't offend, Ulster Man.

7 November 2006 at 13:53  
Blogger Serf said...

I am often struck by how intelligent "outsiders" seem to value that which is good about our nation and culture more than most of us seem to. Immigrants who send their children home to attend schools modeled on Blighty's best, are the most obvious.

Now here we have a man whose roots lie elsewhere, and yet is a better defender of our culture than any of his peers. It seems that you don't know the value of what you have, unless you really understand what the alternative is.

7 November 2006 at 15:42  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Ulster Man - that is the way the C of E functions and Williams founded Affirming Catholicism - so you work it out.

Carey has spoken much more critically of Islam than Nazir-Ali and is busy providing alternative oversight to some American ECUSA parishes............

on 25 March 2004, after his retirement, he made a strongly worded speech attacking lack of democracy and innovation in Muslim countries. He alleged a lack of critical scholarship toward the Qur'an and said that moderate Muslims should "resist strongly" the take-over of Islam by extremists. He also criticised the majority of Muslims, who do not support extremists, for not denouncing them. This speech was widely interpreted as an outspoken attack on Islam.

In September 2006, he backed the Pope in the Pope Benedict XVI Islam controversy and declared that "there will be no significant material and economic progress [in Muslim communities] until the Muslim mind is allowed to challenge the status quo of Muslim conventions and even their most cherished shibboleths."[3] However, his comments attracted much less attention and interest than those of the Pope, even on so incendiary a topic.

In November 2006, he was barred from delivering a Church Mission Society lecture at Bangor Cathedral by the Dean of Bangor, who was reported [4] as explaining the ban on the basis that Lord Carey had become "a factor of disunity and of disloyalty to Rowan Williams, a divisive force."

BTW - Carey is an Evangelical....the news may not have reached the Presbyterians yet

7 November 2006 at 18:26  
Anonymous Voyager said...

7 November 2006 at 18:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bishop Michael should be Archbishop. The C of E is suffocating for the want of an inspirational leader - not necessarily a brilliant theologian.
When Pope Benedict was under fire from oppresive muslim elements, the silence from Canterbury was deafening.
Oh that's right, I think he made a speech about taking care of children.
Has he really said that religions should exist side by side?
The word wimp springs to mind.

7 November 2006 at 21:26  
Anonymous Colin said...


It seems that you don't know the value of what you have, unless you really understand what the alternative is.


8 November 2006 at 19:27  
Anonymous Colin said...

His Grace to the rescue. What should we think of this?

Anglicans must split, says bishop:

A split in the Anglican Church is inevitable with divisions between liberal and conservative factions "irreconcilable", a senior bishop says. The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, told the Daily Telegraph there were "virtually two religions" in the Church...

"My fear is that the Church of England has made a number of moves in the liberal, Protestant direction," he said.

"That gives me concerns that the Bible will become less important and that the Church is moving away from its traditional Catholic order."

CoE = traditional Catholic order ???

8 November 2006 at 20:50  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Yes Colin since the C of E retains the parish structure of the Catholic Church which precded it and the Bishops and the C of E regards itself as a Reformed Catholic Church out of sympathy with Rome but not a Protestant Church in the sense of Presbyterian and Lutheran.

What Rochester is saying is that the tensions will split the C of E into Anglo-Catholic wings and Protestant Sects - with the problem being that the Anglo-Catholics might keep the gay lobby for the love of costume - the Evangelicals going their own way as the fast growing part of the Church

What he says must be viewed in an Anglican context and outsiders do not understand Anglicanism very well - it is a unique response to The Reformation which by its nature makes it harder to be dogmatically infallible - which Roman Catholicism and Presbyterianism seem to want to be

9 November 2006 at 07:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, no, no. You're all wrong. The BBC is right and as this is an IN DEPTH assessment, there is no more to be said:

So, there is no threat from Islam in Europe - we are the threat.

9 November 2006 at 09:53  
Anonymous Colin said...


On the BBC website you have given, I find the following articles which do not seem to support your hypothesis that there is "no threat from Islam in Europe":

(1) Islam is widely considered Europe's fastest growing religion, with immigration and above average birth rates leading to a rapid increase in the Muslim population.

(2) Europe's angry young Muslims

(3) 'Bin Laden is seen as a hero'

What do you mean by "we are the threat" ?

I don't know about you but I didn't or do want to kill anybody who doesn't share my beliefs.
Maybe I threaten the self-esteem of some people by working and paying taxes to finance their welfare benefits.

19 November 2006 at 19:37  
Anonymous Cantabriggia said...

No. He should not be ABC.
He is an uninformed and reckless influence playing to the bigotry of a minority, an inflammatory and prejudiced mouthpiece heaping coals on an already troubled cultural divide, and an insult to the liberal traditions of this church. He does not deserve the attention he recieves from some quarters, any more than Abu Hamza deserves the praise he receives from some Muslims.

25 December 2006 at 21:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even though this bishop hates gays(due to his misunderstanding of the bible) he still has the royal bollocks to stand against Islamism in the uk.
Normally I would tell him to sling his hook, but I think he should be ABC.
By the way, does anyone know what the score is on C of E joining forces with Roman Catholics under the supervision of the Pope? (Another "End days" Satanic move)

1 July 2008 at 22:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said... is YOU who sounds like a prejudiced mouthpiece.
What an awful thing to say about anyone because they dont have your views.
It is bullshit like that which will bring Islam down around your conceited ears, and all your grovelling will serve only one have your throat cut by a muslim knife last of all

1 July 2008 at 22:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What an incisive and wise man, he is not afraid of the pc brigade, the religious liberals who fail our past nor the cowards who fail to speak up - indeed the emperor has no clothes!

16 December 2009 at 19:49  

Post a Comment

<< Home