More – and why not? – on the Lambeth Palace debacle. From Hardeep Singh at Quillette:
This deeply embarrassing and entirely avoidable episode raises questions about the Anglican Church’s judgment in forming suitable interfaith partnerships. It also raises questions about the adequacy—or, indeed, the existence—of Lambeth Palace’s due-diligence procedures. It’s not as if Ashrafi’s views were hard to uncover—a cursory online search would have sufficed. Unfortunately, the Anglican leadership has form with this sort of thing. In 2016, Mullally’s predecessor, Justin Welby, hosted a Pakistani cleric in Lambeth Palace, who had described Salman Taseer’s assassin as a martyr. Then in 2023, the Jewish Chronicle reported that Welby had invited “hardline Islamists” for tea and cake, including a cleric with ties to the Iranian regime. Lord Carlile KC, a former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, remarked that the Church ought to be more careful when choosing interfaith partners.
It was Welby who arranged this latest award, apparently. No indication that Mullally had any doubts about it though.
Mullally’s troubling photograph is now an unfortunate part of her legacy. Even before Ashrafi’s obnoxious views were uncovered, the photograph of Ashrafi’s veiled wife was already raising eyebrows. The images create a stark juxtaposition: the progressive Church of England celebrating its first female archbishop as a milestone for women’s equality, alongside a woman whose identity—including her full name—has been obliterated by reactionary religious dogma….
Why did Mullally agree to a photograph with Mrs Ashrafi in the first place? Did her advisers not foresee the backlash? This is the problem with interfaith politics. Aside from the platitudes, the niceties, the tea and biscuits (or samosas, when a token Hindu or Sikh is included), there’s been a consistent failure to acknowledge or confront intolerant and extreme ideas embedded in foundational scriptures. The reluctance to court disagreement and the eagerness to appear broad-minded has created a self-defeating, performative interfaith culture that tolerates intolerance rather than challenging it, while further marginalising moderate minority voices….
There is now also a petition calling for Mullally’s resignation. “I doubt whether Mullally will ever live this down,” Tim Dieppe, head of public policy at Christian Concern, tells me. “Her actions have brought the Church of England into disrepute. Whatever moral authority she once had is now severely damaged, probably irrecoverably. I therefore think that she now needs to resign.”
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the National Secular Society, tells me that the photograph and the award decision illustrate the Church’s naivety “about the figures and practices it legitimises in the name of interfaith engagement.” In a 2013 report titled “The Interfaith Industry,” Sam Westrop pointed out that interfaith initiatives are easily exploited by extremist groups, which use them to gain access to politicians and policymakers. Westrop, who is currently the director of the Middle East Forum’s Islamist Watch programme, tells me that the whole idea needs to be rethought: “An actual, useful interfaith program, never tried before, would put aside the awards and cupcakes and instead establish partnerships with Muslim reformists to identify and defeat the Islamist ideological forces that sow ruin on generations of Muslims, incite violence and divide societies. The Church and other Abrahamic groups show little interest in this much-needed work, to the detriment of sidelined moderate Muslims everywhere.”
Leave a Reply