What do you think of this bishop’s comments on Islamic extremism?

Question

Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir Ali, Church of England’s only Asian bishop criticised British Muslims for promoting “victimhood” and pardoning the violent Islamic extremists. The bishop was born in Pakistan. His parents converted from Islam. He comments that the Islam in Britain in 1970 was “pietistic, Sufi orientated”

He also observed that Islam in the UK had changed dramatically by 1980. He blames fundamentalist Imams and [the Internet] for the changing face of Islam, which is increasingly tilting towards extremism. The immigrant Imams “complaint often boils down to the position that it is always right to intervene when Muslims are victims, as in Kosovo, and always wrong when the Muslims are oppressors or terrorists, as with the Taliban and in Iraq.”

Dr Nazir-Ali, 57, who attended a Roman Catholic school in Karachi, believes that Britain’s fundamental character derives from Christianity and opposes moves to dilute this by multiculturalism. Dr Nazir-Ali also said: “I can see nothing in Islam that prescribes the wearing of a full-face veil.”

Does the opinion of the bishop not carry weight as being born in Pakistan would have some sympathy with Islam?
He is a man of the cloth and is the Church’s acknowledged expert on Islam.

This is based on a report on :-
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2439273,00.html

On the question of the veil, the view of someone with knowledge of both Christianity and Islam, sounds more balanced than that of 'Mr Stick'.

What is the single most significant reason for the growth of Islam?

Cannot give 10 points for just 'cut & paste' job to 'Nick L'.

Answer 1

That's a person who does not like Islam, hence he converted. I have nothing against that, is free to do so, God will judge us all.
Since I am against Islamic extremists, I don't mind anyone bashing them. The full face veil is their invention.

Answer 2

Agree with all of the following answers, given by others.

1) that's one smart Bishop, indeed.

2) It seems to be correct, at least from what was posted...IMO(in my opinion) islam is the greatest evil facing the world today.

3) He is the best theologian that the Anglican Communion has produced in the last 50 years (the last one being Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey).
He is, as my English brethren say: "Spot ON!"
Fr. Nazir-Ali for Archbishop of Canterbury!!

4) I'd have to agree with the bishop.

5) I would say it is a thoughtful and well reasoned opinon. I certainly agree with his assessment of multiculturalism. Which from what I have read seems to have gone insane in the UK.
Does his opinon have more weight because he was born in Pakistan? Perhaps for some. I think the fact that he is a learned man and a recognized expert might have more pull for some people.

6) I believe he is right, it is simply a unwritten Islamic law to oppress woman that's all.

7) He,s Right , Pity a few Hundred Thousand more of them don,t publically express the same point of view. ???

8) That's a person who does not like Islam, hence he converted. I have nothing against that, is free to do so, God will judge us all.
Since I am against Islamic extremists, I don't mind anyone bashing them. The full face veil is their invention.

9) I am suspicious of most stated certainties of faith. We only have someone's word that what they say is the truth. Fundamentalists of any persuasion should be laughed out of their closed minds. The Bishop of Rochester seems mild in comparison with the Moslem leaders who advocate death to those who don't agree with them. I know we are told time and time again that they are unrepresentative of the religion but I never hear of anyone who does represent the religion telling them to shut up because they are giving it a bad name.

10) He has a good point.
Someone needs to say it.

11) Now that is a man who is talking sense. If only the evil followers of islam will listen

That is 11 answers in agreement and 4 against.
We will make progress with perseverance.

Answer 3

I would say it is a thoughtful and well reasoned opinon. I certainly agree with his assessment of multiculturalism. Which from what I have read seems to have gone insane in the UK.

Does his opinon have more weight because he was born in Pakistan? Perhaps for some. I think the fact that he is a learned man and a recognized expert might have more pull for some people.

Answer 4

Having been born in Pakistan doesn't mean he would have any sympathies with Muslims. Whether or not he finds anything in Islam that prescribes wearing the full face-veil is not really of any significance.
He supports multiculturalism in the UK (obviously as his parents are immigrants), but not the diversity of religions that come with it.

Answer 5

I am suspicious of most stated certainties of faith. We only have someone's word that what they say is the truth. Fundamentalists of any persuasion should be laughed out of their closed minds. The Bishop of Rochester seems mild in comparison with the Moslem leaders who advocate death to those who don't agree with them. I know we are told time and time again that they are unrepresentative of the religion but I never hear of anyone who does represent the religion telling them to shut up because they are giving it a bad name.

Answer 6

He is the best theologian that the Anglican Communion has produced in the last 50 years (the last one being Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey).

He is, as my English brethren say: "Spot ON!"

Fr. Nazir-Ali for Archbishop of Canterbury!!

Answer 7

extremely! in the previous, Christian extremism has delivered approximately very unsightly issues. in specific, there have been the Crusades. in the 1st one, some extremists went to the close to East, burned down a city without bothering to confirm what faith the locals practiced, killed the inhabitants and ate the toddlers for dinner (you may verify this out on Google in case you doubt me yet that's a certainty). It became out that the inhabitants have been Christians, not Muslims. yet, in spite of if that they have been Muslims, I infrequently think of this variety of habit could have been much less deplorable. have you ever heard of pogroms? those have been little workouts in Christian beastliness that have been quite undemanding in the middle a protracted time for the time of Europe. The pious Christians of the day compelled the Jews to all stay mutually in a definite area of city. Then, each so usually, the Christians could party and carry a massacre of the close by Jews. That exchange right into a pogrom. a number of my ancestors narrowly escaped a number of those. So i'm right here in the present day to tell you approximately them. Christians elect to think of that they are too extreme-high quality to do undesirable issues. yet that's only simply by fact they don't be attentive to historic previous. historic previous tells us that Christians have been fantastically nasty at circumstances. The Ku Klux Klan exchange into crammed with Christians in our united states of america, regardless of each thing. They killed people and burned crosses on lawns to instruct their religiosity. it relatively is totally threatening, do not you think of? It exchange into meant to be. So specific, I do think of Christian evangelism could be of venture. i've got heard some people definitely use it that way. i've got heard a number of my acquaintances say they had help bombing abortion clinics -- with docs, nurses, and sufferers interior. i've got heard some evangelicals say they had help the homicide of specific politicians whom they disagreed with. that's fantastically darn extreme! that's approximately as threatening because it gets!

Answer 8

He,s Right , Pity a few Hundred Thousand more of them don,t publically express the same point of view. ???

Answer 9

I agree but think that the Christian / Judean cultures do the same thing

Answer 10

I believe he is right, it is simply a unwritten Islamic law to oppress woman that's all.