THE big guns of 121 George Street have now been wheeled out to try to defend the indefensible litigation being pursued by their zealous law department against my colleagues at the Tron (Letters, October 29).

But what a lot of disingenuous sophistry they employ.

Dr Barclay et al speak about the new congregation, but we are not a new congregation. We are precisely the same congregation that has served the city of Glasgow for decades. The salient fact they fail to admit is that there is simply no Church of Scotland congregation any longer at St George's Tron. Not one single member of the congregation has asked to remain a member of a "continuing Church of Scotland congregation" despite several invitations to do so. The only congregation is the existing one. Why would the existing congregation hand over books and records to a non-existent congregation?

The accounts of the congregation have already been lodged with the Scottish Charity Regulator, so that too is a spurious argument. In respect of the manse, it was gifted to our congregation for the benefit of the minister. Putting aside all legal arguments, why is the Church of Scotland so keen to evict a minister and his family to make way for a non-existent minister of a fictional congregation?

There has never been any question of the current congregation "appropriating" the church building. The congregation has done only good for the general trustees, expending to date £2.6 million of their own money, not only dramatically improving the building, but saving it from structural collapse. But having saved them from having yet another decaying old building they are forced to sell for a minimal amount. It appears our generosity will now be shamefully exploited.

The idea that these intelligent men firmly believe it is possible to reproduce the current ministry from thin air after evicting the congregation is simply not credible (although the same propensity to delusion did lead to the Kirk squandering £13m of worshippers' money on its luxury hotel in Israel . Profit is surely part of the driving force here. After a few years of token usage of the church building, the general trustees will feel free to sell this historic building commercially, profiting from our enriching of it, and the city's building of it, but certainly not acting in line with the trust on which it was bestowed upon them, for the use of public Christian witness in the city centre.

Currently the building is open every day, for the public and for the many ministries that operate out of it. If the current congregation vacates the building, it will be left as an empty building. There may be a cosmetic attempt to bus-in a congregation and appoint a minister, but whoever or whatever is served by this iniquitous act of eviction of the large, existing congregation, it will not be the people of Glasgow. Already the reputation of the Church of Scotland has suffered grievously worldwide. Surely the big guns would be better served trying to bring a Christian resolution to the situation rather than pouring more oil on the flames?

Rev Dr Robert S Fyall,

20a Whitehaugh Road, Glasgow.

I FIND it interesting that the previous congregation of St George's Tron wish to be dealt with in a fair and amicable manner.

It has been extremely critical of the way it has been dealt with by the Church of Scotland.

However the former congregation left the Church of Scotland.

Why does it now expect the Church of Scotland to fall over backwards to meet its demands?

It seems to me the former congregation is trying to cling to a valuable piece of central Glasgow estate which is owned by the church which they have rejected. I would have respect for them if they had left and established a new church elsewhere in the city centre.

Charles Thompson,

60 Grandtully Drive, Glasgow.