It is sad The Argus has recently had to highlight the financial problems facing the various religious bodies responsible for managing and maintaining our churches.

These are important buildings, created by man, that have continued to provide not only comfort and peace for many of us but also act as a readily accessible touchstone to our architectural and spiritual history.

At various times in my life I have been fortunate to find, within their walls, an opportunity to restore my calm through personal reflection.

Now that we are able to be spiritual without being religious, would it not be possible for these icons of our inner spirituality to serve a greater "secular" (ie: non-religious) role?

If the religious authorities concerned felt able to offer these communal resources to non-religious groups perhaps it would be possible for them to continue to be economically viable and, at the same time, serve and preserve society's current spiritual needs. Our churches and cathedrals are an inspiring and important social resource and it would be careless in the extreme if they disappeared to make way for some (I'm sure, very worthy) but essentially less spiritual purpose.

What do other readers think?

-Roger Heygate Browne, Hove