"Christian doctrine is offensive"

The Archbishop of Canterbury has a unique talent for putting things in their easiest-to-mock form. Take these comments, for example:

Christian doctrine is offensive to Muslims, the Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday.

Dr Rowan Williams also criticised Christianity's history for its violence, its use of harsh punishments and its betrayal of its peaceful principles.

His comments came in a highly conciliatory letter to Islamic leaders calling for an alliance between the two faiths for 'the common good'.

But it risked fresh controversy for the Archbishop in the wake of his pronouncement earlier this year that a place should be found for Islamic sharia law in the British legal system.

To start with, the followers of the two religions have been warring with one another, off and on (mostly on) for well over a thousand years. The score was decidedly in favour of Islam until the 17th century, and since then has shifted to favour Christianity. (Anyone who tries to bring up the Crusades as "proof" that Christianity was the primary aggressor has clearly never read anything about medieval history.)

Desperate to make the game more competitive, the Archbishop has been working tirelessly to put the initiative back in Islam's court. His odd interpretation both of history and of Islamic beliefs makes it even more difficult to discern which team he's actually supporting:

The Archbishop's letter is a reply to feelers to Christians put out by Islamic leaders from 43 countries last autumn.

In it, Dr Williams said violence is incompatible with the beliefs of either faith and that, once that principle is accepted, both can work together against poverty and prejudice and to help the environment.

You can only believe that violence is "incompatible with the beliefs of either faith" if you very carefully cherry-pick selected parts of the respective holy writings while turning a blind eye to other parts.

The Archbishop appeared to rebuke his colleague, Bishop of Rochester Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, who criticised his sharia lecture and who maintains that Christianity is central to British law, politics and society.

'Religious identity has often been confused with cultural or national integrity, with structures of social control, with class and regional identities, with empire: and it has been imposed in the interest of all these and other forms of power,' he said.

The Archbishop said that faiths which reject the use of violence should learn to defend each other in their mutual interest.

Historically, there have been remarkably few major faiths which rejected the use of violence. Those faiths which tried to do so generally found themselves unable to resist the impact of rival religions with no such internal restrictions.