I AM flabbergasted by two aspects of the letter which bore the heading Brainwashed by Islamic propaganda' (August 22).

The first is the total lack of courage on the part of the writer in his/her choice to remain anonymous, since we cannot hope to sustain a meaningful or creative public debate about the relationship between different cultures, religions and racial groups unless we know who we are talking to rather than talking about.

The second is the complete caricature of Islam the writer advances, a caricature that plays into the hands of the ignorant, the prejudiced and the extremist.

When the writer talks about leading Muslim clerics', for example, by what definition is the word leading' being used?

I know of a few extremist figures who have aggressively advocated the abandonment of democracy', but I know of no mainstream Muslim clerics who would wish to see British society governed by a system of Sharia law'.

Indeed, I know of no mainstream Muslim clerics who would wish anything other than to see Britain's democracy enhanced and strengthened by the full participation of all its citizens.

A faith community cannot and must not be judged, as the writer seems to wish to judge them, by the standards of a few very extreme characters, whose aspirations and actions have been criticised in the strongest terms by the mainstream Muslim community.

Least of all, must the work of Anjum Anwar, one of Lancashire's leading religious figures - who has already received the MBE for her unstinting commitment to our community - be subject to this kind of underhand and factually-inaccurate attack.

Let us clear up three of the inaccuracies. Firstly, the parents of children to whom Ms Anwar has made presentations have all been consulted about her work, through the ballot box since it forms part of the wider and much-needed community cohesion and integration agendas at local and national levels.

Secondly, there are certainly majority Muslim countries - Nigeria and Pakistan would be two - where representatives of minority faiths engage in dialogue with the majority faith community to promote understanding and friendship.

Thirdly, when it comes to the writer's defence of so-called western civilisation', if his/her letter is an example of it, one can only think of Gandhi's response when he was asked what he thought of western civilisation.

He said, simply, "I think it's a very good idea."

There are none so blind as those who will not see,' concludes the writer.

Following his/her intolerant and ill-judged diatribe, another saying of Gandhi seems somehow to be so much more apposite: an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.' Is this, I wonder, the kind of civilisation the writer seeks to advance and defend?

CANON CHRIS CHIVERS, Canon Chancellor (with responsibility for inter-faith relations), Blackburn Cathedral.