HOW TO CONTACT US

Letters for publication must be accompanied by a full postal address and a telephone number where the writer may be contacted. Please state “For Publication.” The full address will not be used on publication, but we will NOT publish letters where we are asked to withhold names entirely. Letters may be edited.

For the return of photographs or an answer to mail, please include S.A.E. Otherwise, once used, Photographs will be destroyed...

Tsunami Disaster
After watching a hour's report about the disaster, my son David (aged 12 years) called his friend Niall and arranged to do a sponsored cycle ride for the appeal. I suggested a cycle ride in the summer. But they drew up a route of 22KM beginning at Morrison's supermarket in Morecambe, travelling to Glassen Dock and returning to Salt Ayre and set the date for February 14th. I still thought this was too early but the boys proved me wrong. In 24 hours they raised £200 in sponsorship. The boys have now turned serious, aiming to raise £1,000. They have written to Morrisons and the local newspaper and their parishes for support. If any Voice readers would like to support them we would welcome you to help cheer them on their way and applaud their return. They aim to leave Morrisons at 10:30am. Sponsorship can be sent to the "Tsunami Disaster Appeal", c/o David Townsend and Niall Ryan, 3Windham Place, Scale Hall, Lancaster. LA1 5HA. Tel:01524 381877.
Catherine L. Townsend
Lancaster.

The Possibilities of Church Unity
I write to congratulate The Voice for publishing such a healthy selection of articles on Church Unity and in particular for the stimulating headline: Historic divide-does it still matter? (Jan 2005). Clearly we need to ask ourselves question: What do we want or expect when we talk about Christian Unity? To which I for one would respectfully suggest, not a totally unified set of beliefs and common practices of worship. We don't even have that degree of cohesion in the Roman branch of Christianity. Isn't it more about appreciating the basic tenets that bind us together and accepting that differences in customs and traditions are entirely natural (just take church music as an example)? Why can’t we just enjoy the richness of diversity and forget about uniformity?
Thankfully we have moved a tremendous way in the last 50 years since my school days there were two opposing groups: Catholics and Protestants! So is it not perhaps time to drop the notion of having an annual Unity Week when we may feel the need to participate in what are often rather awkward head counts and when the shared communion issue causes embarrassment? I remember hearing the late Cardinal Hume saying that we should get on with church unity at grassroots levels as official moves could take forever. So why not begin by reading each other’s noticeboards, exchanging newsletters and sharing on a more regular basis in events organised by our neighbouring churches (anniversaries, socials, lent-groups etc)?
At the same time, could the Asian Earthquake disaster be the wake-up call we need to act together as one Christian family in today's global village? How much more effective we could be if we spoke and acted together on such occasions. Spectacular though the emergency fund raising may be at present, what of tomorrow and the next humanitarian crisis? Is it only when Western interests and Western lives are lost that we sit up and really take notice? How about making Churches Together a really meaningful slogan and inspirational model in 2005 when the UK's leadership of the G8 and Presidency of the EU provides an ideal platform for action?
Peter Donaghy,
Cockermouth

Politically Correct Language
I was saddened and troubled by your exclusive use of the word 'partner' in you editorial in the January issue of The Voice. Is this a sign of things to come, that even in our supposedly Catholic diocesan newspaper, those of us who are married are no longer going to be dignified by the use of words like spouse, wife, husband but simply lumped together as merely 'partners'? I do not know what prompted you to use the word 'partner' exclusively in the first place. Maybe it was a desire not to offend same sex couples or co-habitees or to show how politically correct The Voice is, but whatever it was it shows little regard for those of us who, against the odds, are trying to uphold the sanctity and dignity of marriage in an unsympathetic, if not downright hostile, environment. I would like to make it clear that I have no objection to the use of the word 'partner', where appropriate, what I do object to is its universal and exclusive use as though words like wife, husband, spouse no longer existed and must not be used. Surely it wouldn't have been too much to have inserted the words husband, wife or spouse into your editorial as well as that, to say the least, most ambiguous of words 'partner'. I would expect better from a "Catholic" newspaper.
Bernard O'Connor
Workington.

The Offending Sentence: “The man or woman who daily tends to their partners’ needs may be doing so because they feel they have no choice, anything for a quiet life.”