I READ with considerable interest reports on the conclusion of researcher Dr Steve Aisthorpe, in his book The Invisible Church, that many retain a Christian faith notwithstanding lack of attendances at church services (“Rise of ‘churchless faith’ revealed by research “, The Herald, March 24).

The decline of the Church of Scotland with regard to membership, has appeared to be irresistible. Membership in the early 1950s was more than a million. Today it is understood to be between 300,000 and 400,000. There has been much discussion within our national church and outwith it about the number of people in Scotland who have become “unchurched”.

The conclusion of Dr Aisthorpe, referred to above, may provide some grounds for optimism to many. The Church of Scotland is, nevertheless, facing considerable financial and ministerial manpower constraints leading to closing of churches and increased linking of parishes. Expressions of solidarity, sympathy, or empathy from outwith the pew will not of themselves assist in combatting the ongoing tide of contraction. Such sentiments, although welcome, butter no parsnips, as the saying goes. The work of the church also requires significant practical assistance to continue with its work.

The point has been made that Christianity in Great Britain is not so much in decline as in transition. The question remains: in transition to what?

Ian W Thomson,

38 Kirkintilloch Road, Lenzie.

DAVID Robertson (Letters, March 24) tries to justify his charge of racism against Ruth Davidson by pre-senting "cultural imperialism" as a form of racism. Racism, however, is specifically an attitude of supe-riority based on racial difference, and if racial difference was not a factor in Ruth Davidson's snubbing of President Mahama, then there was no "tinge of racism" in it and he should not have used that word or referred to "white liberal elites".

Let us now examine the charge of "cultural imperialism". If such an attitude, according to Mr Robert-son, "assumes that “our” cultural values are the obvious “universal values” of all humanity", Ms Da-vidson can hardly be guilty of this, as her snubbing of Mr Mahama was surely motivated by a belief that he and his government do not share all her values.

Perhaps Mr Robertson meant that cultural imperialists believe their values should be universal, in which case we could regard as a cultural imperialist any Western liberal who thinks all countries should embrace legal gender and religious equality, democracy or freedom of peaceful ideological expression. If such is the definition of "cultural imperialism", I happily plead guilty.

Mr Robertson would no doubt enter a "not guilty" plea, on the grounds that he doesn't regard his own Christian cultural values as better than others or deserving of universal acceptance.

Robert Canning,

Secular Scotland,

58a Broughton Street, Edinburgh.