As a Church of Scotland minister of some 48 years standing, now semi-retired (they never let us go completely) I have got used to the steady decline of the Kirk in terms of ever poorer attendances at worship and increasing disregard by most of society.
Most of my generation of ministers are left wondering what we did wrong. Were we that much worse than those who went before us?
I therefore turned to your report ("Couples shun Kirk weddings for Humanist ceremonies", June 18) with a sense of resignation, and was deeply saddened by it. Not for what it reported, which I expected, but for the things which were said. I winced at what Gary McLelland of the Humanist Society Scotland was quoted as saying; not because I disagreed with him, but because I recognised the truth of what he said, and it hurt.
"When you look at general attitudes in society, the fact that we (HSS) are embracing and open about our support for same sex marriages. I think that adds to the general boost of people wanting to celebrate their marriage in a humanist way." Ouch!
"When you look at what religious organisations seem to spend their time pondering in society it tends to be stuff that the vast majority of us, in terms of equality, have left behind long ago." Ouch!
"We don't concern ourselves with judging people's lifestyle and a lot of people feel disillusioned with the churches' stances on a lot of equality issues." Ouch!
"Religious hierarchies are just so out of step with their own members and I think people see humanists as a grass roots movement that is more inclusive." Ouch!
He makes a valid point in every paragraph. When will the Church wake up, start being more positive and open, and be willing to let go the battles and superstitions of the past?
George White, the Kirk's Acting Principal Clerk, was no doubt right when he said, regarding church weddings: "We can't ditch God." But what if God, in his love for and desire to liberate society, should ditch the Church - or has he already done so?
Rev John Harris,
68 Mitre Road, Jordanhill, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article