The most worrying thing is the almost complete failure of British society-not just the C.of E.-to understand the nature of the threat.There is an almost wilful refusal to accept that if America fails to prevail, our society as we know it is doomed.

Your outbursts are entertaining and occasionally you make a relevant point, but mostly it is lost in the bluster.

Over the last year or so your previous clarity, impartiality, and ruthless common sense has descended into partisan battiness.

At heart, I think you understand that a lot of what you say these days is nonsense, if not downright untrue, and that may explain the increasingly frantic and unreal tone of your writing.

It is sad to see a once good journalist descend so far

It's sad that a person of your intelligence and learning can write like this.

I defy anyone to read what the Archbishop actually said at the memorial service, and come out with the interpretation you have given him.

http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches

Archishop Rowan is a man of great compassion, and would never have abused his position in a service like this - before the pain of a grieving congregation. And he didn't.

Your writing on community politics, education, crime, the family, has meant a great deal. "The fifth column" ?
Is this ironic overstatement? Well more fool me.

Jesse Smith (Revd).

You are right, Jesse. The C of E cannot be an effective fifth column anymore, as its moral degeneracy has ensured that it no longer has any substantial influence or moral authority. Its wishy-washy socialistic whining and moral equivalencing has weakened it beyond repair, as clearly demonstrated by its current posturing over the most important moral and political issues of our time. Compare with the strength of the Evangelicals in the USA and their offshoots elsewhere. I do not necessarily agree with their views, but they have a clear sense of right and wrong, and don't attempt to water down their message ad infinitum.

Its a free for all, dont worry - go on - do what you like ! - we're all christians here !

Well, quite frankly, if you carry on like that you will drive all believers into the arms of allah - this is happening in Sudan & other parts of africa - the archbishop is of course, above such sordid details !

Most of us chattering classes in the west are puritans whether we accept it or not - we can tolerate sodomy, child sexualiation - all sorts of the most depraved things. What we can't handle is hypocrisy - this is why the whole catholic church gets demonised due to the conduct of a small number of its priests - call me naive but I dont believe they are all like that.

Anyway, as GK Chesterton once said - if you dont give people something to believe-in, they will believe in anything - and that's about where the church of england finds itself !

Jesse--would you agree that it would have been reasonable to call those who opposed effective action against Hitler a "fifth column?"

If so, why would those opposing effective action against Saddam not fall into the same category?

"why would those opposing effective action against Saddam not fall into the same category?"

For a start, to equate the threat posed against the west by Saddam with that of Hitler is unfair. Nazi Germany was a military giant posing an obvious, imminent physical threat to its European neighbours.

Saddam, on then other hand, was (is?) a tinpot dictator who, although odious, presented no immediate military threat to the west, as the failure to find any WMD and the abysmal performance of the Iraqi military during the war has demonstrated.

Lots of people opposed the second world war on moral grounds. Unless they actually participated in subversion, they were given the status of conscientous objectors, not fifth columnists.

On the other hand, Germans who opposed their country's military agression were branded fifth coumnists, and were imprisoned in concentration camps and/or executed for their stand.

I don't want to get in to a running conversation, but...

It was the suggestion that the Church itself is utterly corrupt and part of a fifth column. Any lazy, sixth form sneer can be printed against Christianity and the Church nowadays. I'll try and remember that i'm part of a "Fifth column" as I wander the streets of my northern council estate. I wonder if you can print this rubbish stuff about any other faith community nowadays, and get away with it.

It's true that the Archbishop was skeptical about the war in Iraq (for what's its worth, i was a passionate supporter of military). But this is the point, the Archbishop never abused his position at a memorial service to parade those doubts to a grieving congregation. He ackowledged the sacrifice and bravery of those who paid the price for Iraqi freedom, questioned the easy, Pilate-like washed hands of non interventionists, and said that whatever our views on the action, we've all got to dedicate ourselves to the long haul of bringing new hope to the Iraqi people. Shock Horror!

Jesse.

Rowan Williams is a Druid, who condones immorality and is in charge of an organisation which is in breach of its own rules.

Above all though Rowan Williams seems to stand for nothing other than atheism.

I saw him on tv talking to some guy about theology. When asked if there was any benifit to being a Christian, he could only come up with some speal suggesting that Christians might be more content in themselves! What about going to the new Jerusalem when you die? What about not going to hell?

To me that just sums him up. He seems to look at Christianity as a religion which can be of some benefit to society. Well that is indeed an atheist's view of Christianity. But Christianity is NOT a religion, it is a relationship. It is a relationship with the one true God who created the heavens and the earth - the God of Israel, who sent his son to die, so that whosoever believed in him could be saved.

Now, there are plenty of born-again evangelical anglicans - don't get me wrong. But Rowan Williams and much of what the Anglican church stands for is exactly what the apostle Paul warned would come in the last days, when he said there would be people "having a form of godliness but denying its power".

Richard - you are 'right on brother' - see my comments on this, Oct12 - Best wishes, Jimmy.

Dave P...you argue that Saddam presented no "immediate military threat" to the West. Hitler presented little immediate threat in (say) 1935--does this mean something shouldn't have been done about him at that time? Was it morally necessary to wait until his arms buildup was complete and fortifications in place, making any action against him very expensive?

As 9/11 should have made clear, the nature of the concept "military threat" has changed. It is no longer necessary to have Panzer divisions or a Luftwaffe to cause death on a large scale. Whatever WMD did or did not exist in Iraq, there is not the slightest question about Saddam's intent to acquire and/or develop them. And, after Saddam, his sons would have continued on the same path. Do you really think that sanctions, boycotts, etc could have been effective in preventing Saddam from acquiring WMD for the next century or so?

Melanie is right about Rowan, but don't worry, folks, no one takes the Archbishop seriously; except for those homosexualists, feminists and neo-pagans hoping to use this useful idiot to further the degeneration of a once noble Christian Church and thereby assist in the undermining of the moral character of the citizens of the West. Rowan is a sympton, not the disease. The sensible people of Britain must concern themselves with exposing the more dangerous enemies in your midst: the radical leaders of the 1 million Muslims in Britain and their apologists in the Media and Parliament.

Good luck...you're going to need it.

Rowan Williams' concern about the Iraq war is, in my opinion, only tangentally related to arguments about Just War, WMD etc. If you read his other public pronouncements since his enthronement, and then read what he has to say about the war, it's hard not to conclude that his anti-war stance has much to do with visceral anti-Americanism and less to do with arguments about Just War, whatever he might like to claim. He has first hand experience - he was in a building that took damage on 9/11 - yet it is hard to find any kind of meaningful discussion in his writings about the nature of Islamic extremism or Baathist state rule. The mirror is always turned to the West.
When he came into office, we were promised a great theologian. What we have had so far is a man who can parrot Guardian op-ed articles no better than the rest of us.
However, I have no sympathy with your commentators here who throw 'Druid' at him, or criticise him for handing his church over to etc etc etc. I suspect your church traditionalist commentators do not realise how absurd they look. And given Williams' treatment of my former and excellent priest Jeffrey John, I suspect that the conservatives in the CofE have their man without realising it.

Misfortune shows those who are not really friends.