Letters: Kirk’s advice arises out of concern for parishioners

She says that parishioners with serious underlying health conditions are explicitly urged not to attend church services, characterising this as “crass”, “cruel” and “negligent”. This is not true.

The guidance suggests that those over 70 should consider carefully whether they should attend church, and that anyone in the extremely vulnerable category, who has been advised by the NHS to shield at home, would be best advised not to come to church for the time being. This follows the clear and unequivocal advice from the Scottish Government, the NHS and the Chief Medical Officer.

READ MORE: Letters: Double standards on taxes

It is consistent with the advice published by all faith communities. With them, we echo the sentiment expressed in the Government guidance: “We would not ask you to do this if it was not necessary. We believe that it is needed to save lives and protect the NHS.”

Our guidance is explicit in expecting congregations to take steps to ensure those in the vulnerable category are appropriately supported in their choice to participate in church life in a way that meets individual needs and preferences.

We do not agree with Ms Goring’s view that we should all be able to assess risks and choose for ourselves – regardless of age and health – whether or not to follow medical and Government guidance. Taken to its logical conclusion, it would result in the collapse of the consensual approach to the crisis and would necessitate the imposition of legislative compulsion.

We agree with those in Government that such an outcome is not in keeping with the liberal traditions at the core of our national identity. Whilst our governance through a system of church courts is inevitably hierarchical, our mindset and character as a church are firmly focused on individual liberty. The guidance we have issued is not prescriptive. It is risible to call it a “decree” and assert that “vicious” reprisals lie in wait for those who do not adhere to it.

The Scottish Government’s route map only allows places of worship to reopen to extended groups when we reach Phase 3, a clear indicator of the risks to the health of those attending services. We have a concern for the health of our parishioners, body and soul, and we stand by the guidance we have issued as proportionate, practical and compassionate.

During lockdown, we have seen creativity across our congregations on a level not replicated in living memory. Congregations have come together, in absence, to support each other and those around them.

Many have opened their buildings to those in need, and provided lifeline services such as foodbanks or childcare facilities for key workers. Along with creativity has come a real sense of loss as, for the first time in generations, church doors were ordered to be closed. But the church is its people, not its buildings, and we are confident that relationships that have been forged, or deepened, over the past months will allow us to continue to serve our communities, regardless of how our public worship may require to be configured. Ms Goring is welcome to join us.

Rev Dr George Whyte, Principal Clerk;

Raymond Young, chair of the General Trustees;

Rev Dr John Chalmers, Convener of the Assembly Trustees;

David Kendall, Chief Officer,

The Church of Scotland,

Edinburgh EH2.

ROSEMARY Goring considers the ability to read between the lines is a necessary talent that one needs to have when reviewing any statement issued from the Church of Scotland offices in George Street, Edinburgh. In the 20 months that Ms Goring spent working in the Kirk’s offices she has developed a remarkable talent for reading between the lines and seeing the words that she wants to see. I worked for more than 20 years in these offices and my approach was to read what was in the print. Indeed, great care was taken to ensure that Assembly reports and other instructions were clearly framed and that there was no option for people to frustrate the instructions by reading some get out clause between the lines.

Ms Goring does not specify the document that she finds so offensive, but I am fairly certain that it is a document entitled Covid-19 (coronavirus) Reopening of Church Buildings. She quotes from that document with regard to people in the vulnerable category and attributes weasel words to that statement. I cannot identify any such words and I will be encouraging anyone in the vulnerable category to consider (as instructed) their choice as to how they are to participate in church life. If anyone asks me what to do I will discourage them from following Ms Goring’s cruel assertion that people in the vulnerable category are being told to stay away from church and to make their own choice, which I will support whether the individual chooses to attend worship in their own church, or attend another church, or remain at home and engage in the life of the church through other means.

READ MORE: Billions of barrels of oil to be left untouched in UK experts warn

In the case of the extremely vulnerable Ms Goring asserts that they will receive instructions explicitly urging them not to attend worship. The document states that, “those in the extremely vulnerable category will still be able to participate in church life during the Covid-19 pandemic without the need to attend church. Congregations should also ensure that those in the vulnerable category would be appropriately supported in their choice to participate in church life in a way that meets their own individual needs and preference”.

Those who are in the extremely vulnerable group are the people who are shielding, that is not in contact with anyone other than members of their own household or those providing them with care and by definition they cannot physically join with other people in worship. If the individual is of the view that he or she can join with others then he or she can no longer be classed as an extremely vulnerable person who has to self-isolate by shielding him or herself from others. The document issued from the church offices clearly requires congregations to support those who choose to attend worship. The last person that these people should be consulting is Ms Goring, nor would I pay much heed to the church insider who has clearly indicated to his mother that she is not welcome in her local church.

Sandy Gemmill, Edinburgh EH3.

I AM not a churchgoer, and I have no interests for or against the Church of Scotland. However, as an outsider, reading Rosemary Goring’s article on the church’s handling of vulnerable people attending services, I thought it unbalanced and wrong.

She quoted the note the church issued: “Congregations should ensure that those in the vulnerable category would be appropriately supported in their choice to participate in church life in a way that meets their own individual needs and preferences whilst safeguarding their own health, safety and welfare and those of the wider congregation.”

She called it an edict, which it was not – it was an advisory. She described the content as “weasel words”, which was unfair and harsh. If you read them carefully, they are perfectly clear, and pass the responsibility down to those managing the congregations, who would best know the people they are dealing with as individuals, and therefore be best placed to decide how to act.

Ms Goring says: “I have countless friends in their seventies and eighties who are fitter and sharper than many younger folk. It seems invidious to talk of them as a universally frail category.” As a general perspective, this is absolutely true, but it does not apply to the church’s note, which emphasises health and safety for the congregation and the individuals who make it up, with particular focus on personal “needs and preferences”.

Elderly people are as varied in their nature and outlook as everyone else, and in these circumstances where there is little or no certainty, some will, within the rules, do whatever they want, including going to church services, virus or no virus. Others will be so terrified of the virus that they will not leave home for fear that they will not get back without a death sentence hanging over them. For these, remote worship might well be best for now.

Ms Goring quite rightly says that a church visit with proper distancing is no more dangerous than any other outing, and that danger is small. But it’s the perception of the danger that frightens many of the vulnerable. And, however small, the danger is real. People do catch the virus, and some die from it. The note covers the need to address the requirements of each member of the congregation to help them ascertain their best course of action.

The Church of Scotland got it spot on.

Jim Robertson, East Kilbride.

ROSEMARY Goring’s withering critique of some of the institutional Church of Scotland’s less attractive features could only have been brought into the public domain by, in this case, a newspaper column. The Kirk’s own monthly magazine would never think of doing so. The former Ministers’ Forum publication displayed signs of just such criticism of the National Church’s status quo, but it was gradually, systematically and controllably wound up.

The Church of Scotland authorities therefore, for decades now, have only themselves to blame for ignoring criticism in the hope that it would melt away. But more importantly and, in the context of Rosemary Goring’s article, I am left wondering if all the age 70-plus retired ministers, myself included, who are still willing to provide occasional or regular pulpit supply are themselves now officially redundant and, if so, perhaps the Kirk authorities should brace themselves for an even greater problem than they have at present.

Rev Alistair Jessamine, Strathaven (Minister Emeritus, Dunfermline Abbey).

Read more: Letters: No one is being banished by the Kirk