WHERE stands the Church of Scotland? Sitting on the fence. Just what it did in the run-up to the last referendum. Terrified by “Campaign Fear”, our national Church burbled on about “reconciliation”. “Campaign Smear” finds them silent yet again.

Does our Church have a view on anything that engages the opinions and the future of our people? Take Brexit, where a clear majority of Scots voted to stay and where the disastrous outcome of their wishes being overridden is evident to all. But the Church remains silent.

Take independence. The Church may argue that, despite the consistency of the polls, its members are not of one mind on this, but can they truly justify their inability to support the proposition that the people of Scotland should have the ability to express a view on their constitutional future?

At a more mundane level, is the Church content that, within the United Kingdom, we have the lowest old-age pensions in Europe and that so many of our people rely on food banks? Individual congregations do their bit to try to alleviate some of the worst effects of poverty, but faced with a choice between a future which we would allow Scotland, rather than Westminster, to decide whether to spend Scotland’s taxes on relieving poverty or increasing the stock of nuclear weapons, the Church is like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a car.

As it is, the role of the Church of Scotland does not seem to extend far beyond conducting the ceremonies for hatches, matches and dispatches, and to funding educational establishments and hostels in Israel. Unless it can aspire to more, the claim that it is a “national” church rings utterly false.

Elizabeth Buchan-Hepburn

Edinburgh

WHILE the religious in Scotland will no doubt enjoy celebrating their win against a secular government in the secular courts, the notion that the rights of the religious trump everybody else’s leads us down a very dangerous path, lockdown or not. Further, religious exceptionalism and triumphalism during a global pandemic which no god seems able or willing to address is not exactly a good look. It remains to the enormous credit of the Church of Scotland that it demonstrated true Christian values by distancing itself from this legal challenge.

Alistair McBay

Perth

I’M not surprised Lord Braid at the Court of Session has ruled the Scottish Government acted beyond their emergency powers in closing churches during the pandemic.

In 2010, former Lord Advocate, Lord Clerk Register and honorary president of the Scottish Bible Society, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, called upon the court to take biblical teachings into account when applying the law. All Scottish courts were asked to re-familiarise themselves with biblical principles and act accordingly when presiding over court cases.

He declared that “since the prosecution of crime in Scotland is at the instance of the Crown, the words taken from the coronation oath (accepting the Bible as “Royal Law”), it also served as a reminder that the vital elements of justice and mercy are to be uppermost in the mind of a Crown prosecutor as well as in the mind of the judge”.

Lord Braid said the Scottish Government regulations disproportionately interfered with the freedom of religion secured in the European Convention on Human Rights. So, I think it’s only fair to ask if religionists will still interfere in our lives with the imposition of their “faith” schools; unelected representatives in parliament and on education committees; employment of more hospital chaplains instead of nurses, or continue to benefit from tax exemptions for religious charities and buildings that we all have to pay for?

Secular Scotland

Edinburgh

KEVIN McKenna’s article “Here’s what needs to happen if Yes divisions truly are to be healed” (March 24) actually said very little about what needs to happen and was really a regurgitation of the many complaints he has about the SNP. However, a couple of points merit a response.

Kevin complains that the Scottish Greens have a “historic revulsion to Catholic schools that risks alienating Scotland’s largest pro-independence faith group”. I’m not sure the Catholic Church in Scotland would be happy being described as a “pro-independence faith group” but I’m sure Kevin is more familiar with its political views than I am. However, I know there are independence supporters who take the view that the state – and state schools – should be secular. Does Kevin really believe they should keep quiet about this?

SNP MPs come under attack from Kevin. He suggests that as they have a comfortable career there they are not particularly enthusiastic about independence. Does Kevin have any evidence of this or is it just a part of a “Twitter like” rant against anything SNP? Twitter is the place for these. The National is a newspaper.

Kevin uses the phrase “objective journalism” in his article. This is usually accompanied by facts. This article did not come into that category.

Douglas Morton

Lanark