Sir, My advice to the four churches, and any others similarly minded, to leave the Church of Scotland, is don’t do it; at least not yet.
My first reason is that such action is premature, the Church is not yet in a position to ordain homosexual ministers. Nor will it have that authority until the General Assembly of 2015.
Churches seceding lose the right to argue their case within the court of the church. Each congregation is represented at presbytery by its minister and an elder. If there is a reasoned case to be put, there is plenty of opportunity to make the case over the next two years.
Cessation has many implications for both minister and congregation. The matter of property and the financial support of minister and general running costs. The minister has to consider provision for family and pension.
Perhaps those proposing to leave believe that the threat of secession will affect the outcome at the General Assembly.
Forget it! An anonymous spokesman for the central authority of the church, was recently quoted in The Courier, to the effect that the church would not be moved by a few congregations leaving.
Why not find out what ordinary members of individual congregations think about calling a homosexual minister to their church? Research the matter and make the case!
Rev Jack Gisbey. Whitemyre House, 28 St Andrews Road, Largoward.
Church can’t break the law
Sir, It was not unexpected when Edinburgh’s Holyrood Abbey, Aberdeen’s Gilcomston and Glasgow’s Tron Church left the Kirk when it refused to ban gay clergy outright. These fundamentalist Christian churches had been semi-detached for decades. It was only a question of time before some theological topic tipped them over the edge.
The opt-out decision by a more traditional church, Dundee’s Logie and St John’s Cross, will surprise many but, in fact, it was led for many years by Gilcomston’s minister. The English pastor Dominic Smart is an evangelical preacher noted for his opposition to any church being allowed to call a minister with the “wrong” sexual orientation.
The problem is that it is clearly illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender, race or sexual orientation and a national church can hardly refuse to obey the law of the land.
Rev Dr John Cameron. 10 Howard Place, St Andrews.
We’d have full employment
Sir, David Cameron is banging on about making companies especially the multinationals pay more tax. I have often wondered at the wisdom of charging manufacturers, retailers and other companies local rates and national taxes.
After all, they produce wealth by employing British citizens who then pay all kinds of taxes, local and national.
I remember reading about wise governments in the past who encouraged tradesmen, financiers and manufacturers to set up business in this country. They achieved great success, bringing much prosperity to this country by granting the incomers very favourable tax and trading terms.
Just think how manufacturers from all over the world would flock to the UK if company tax, if any, were cut to the bone.
We would have full employment again and any tax lost from the companies’ contributions would be more than made up for by the hugely increased income from individual taxation and by the vast reduction in unemployment benefit payments.
We already have one of the most ordered and safe societies in the world, with freedom of speech and the press together with religious and political tolerance. My suggested reform would be the icing on the cake.
Just a thought!
George K McMillan. 5 Mount Tabor Avenue, Perth.
Time for some serious thinking
Sir, Your recent editorial about windfarms, Councils forced into a corner, was spot on. There has to be a dichotomy between central government and local government, especially where planning is concerned. After all, local councillors know the feelings of their constituents far better than politicians in Holyrood or Westminster.
Furthermore, windfarms are not just unsightly. They are inefficient. Due to large subsidies, which we the consumer must pay for, they were seen as an easy moneyspinner for entrepreneurs who rushed in without looking at some of the better alternatives. Tidal power is the obvious one but that, of course, would have incurred expensive development costs.
However, it has the merit of providing constant electricity (wind may stop, but tides are constant) whilst, being underwater, they are completely unobtrusive and do not blight the landscape like their Aeolian counterparts.
The whole sorry business smacks of short-termism a fault of which all our politicians seem to be guilty.
I know the SNP government is desperate to prove their green credentials (I am an SNP supporter) but I put it to them that this is not the way to go about it. Surely it is time to call a halt while we have a long-term review of supplying green energy which takes into account the effect on the landscape, efficiency and cost to the consumer.
If we opt for tidal power we will also have to take into account the needs of our hard-pressed fishing industry. Time somebody did some thinking.
Jim Robertson. 194 High Street, Montrose.
What’s Nick looking at?
Sir, What areas of welfare for the rich does Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg want to cut (Courier, June 17)? It can’t be the bus passes they don’t apply for, or the free prescriptions for the over-60s that have been an integral part of the health service for nearly 65 years?
He has already accepted that charging for tuition at universities in England is acceptable. As most rich people aren’t eligible for many benefits anyway, that leaves the one issue he is apparently obsessed with winter fuel payments.
It would be very difficult and costly to introduce means testing into this and many other areas. But leaving that aside the winter fuel payments are an important means of dealing with the national scandal of fuel poverty and arbitrary increases in prices by the large energy companies.
People’s circumstances can change suddenly and the winter fuel payment is one means of helping those in difficulty. It will never be a full answer to tackling the problem of cold for the elderly in winter.
In the last few years it has been reduced from £400 to £300 for the over-80s and £250 to £200 for the 60s to 80s. The Liberal Democrats should tread warily before they plan to reduce it further.
Bob Taylor. 24 Shiel Court, Glenrothes.
We should be welcoming him
Sir, Where is the sense in banning whistle-blower Edward Snowden from Britain? We should be welcoming him with open arms for uncovering the system which spies on all of us and infringes our right to freedom of speech and communications.
Alister Rankin. 93 Whyterose Terrace, Methil, Leven.
A sensible and moderate reform
Sir, Supporters who mainly argue for the retention of Church of Scotland dominance in religious education appear to overlook the fact that Scotland is now multi-religious and also has an increasing proportion of non-believers who deserve equal consideration.
The wider debate over the need for any RE in schools will be with us for some time as many people, and I am one, prefer to have religion observed in the family home and not in the curriculum.
However, personal views should not disbar agreement on all proposals. A petition coming to the Scottish Government would allow parents to opt in to RE rather than the current system whereby all pupils must attend RE if parents do not arrange to have them opted out.
The compulsory system operating in Scotland has caused confusion among parents and arguments with head teachers who may hold differing religious views.
In this age of democratic freedom of choice, not only in the observance of religion but across all social and personal beliefs, this petition should not be made into a religion versus anti-religion debate.
Surely it can be agreed as a sensible, moderate and necessary reform to our Scottish school system. It is backed by parents and many teachers and also has a measure of clerical support.
Angus Brown. The Orchard, Station Road, Longforgan, Dundee.
Someone has got sums wrong
Sir, I read in The Courier (June 12), that Fife Council justifies paying an extraordinary price for the school site, on hilly land not ideal for the intended use.
I own 200 acres of prime agricultural land in St Andrews which is flat and ideal for a school. Will the council pay me £12,000,000 for it? I doubt it. Someone in authority has clearly got their sums wrong!
Dr D King. Kinaldy House, St Andrews.
Restored faith in human kindness
Sir, My mother and I would like to extend our warmest thanks to the many caring strangers who stopped to offer help early one recent Saturday morning, when my mother tripped and fell in Dundee City Centre, hitting her head off the pavement.
You certainly all restored our faith in human kindness.
Special thanks are extended to Mr David Barrie, Dundee City Council’s “City Centre Ambassador” who called for an ambulance, covered my mother with his jacket and remained with us until the ambulance arrived. You were helpful, caring and compassionate, David a wonderful ambassador.
Thanks also to the ambulance crew. The casualty is doing well and recovering at home.
J and J Langlands. 34 William Street, Tayport.