Gentleman,
I notice that in my absence a piece of legislation titled the Supremacy Act 2006 has been passed.
I would like to register my public disgust at the passage of such a bill.
Would you care to elaborate?
Additionally, I note that you did have the opportunity, as did all Hanoverian citizens, to voice opposition to your M.P. and you could even have run for Parliament when elections were held, but at both times you were absent. That is your problem, not ours.
Having been absent and thus unaware and unable to register my disgust during the process, I do so now.
I am disgusted at the establishment of a state religion.
Sir Aderyn:
Excellent! Some would say that, as the author of the Bill and now Archbishop, I ought to denounce your denunciation, but frankly it is immeasurably pleasing to see someone expressing a contrary viewpoint on any major issue. Usually around here we only get trifling complaints when discussing important matters -- the real vitriol and the lengthy posts are reserved for arguments about titles and similar matters.
Honestly, if you can convince the majority of Hanoverians that the Supremacy Act was indeed a disgusting development, then I will gladly step down. Hanover needs a real political opposition -- one that fights about the important issues -- far more than it needs a state church. Personally, I obviously think that the establishment was a relatively benign development, but I say, let the debate begin!
Sincerely,
+ Christopher Bergensis
Mr Aderyn:
Greetings! I understand that you seem to dislike the stated bill. I think that it is best to bring your comments up to your Parliament Representative, he'll make sure, as the representative, to voice your opinion, with this said, if you live in Athenoi, I am at your service.
sincerely,
My parliamentary representatives, it would appear, voted for this piece of legislation.
I draw to your attention article 4 of the Charter of Rights and Liberties of the first Hanoverian constitution, a document that defined the founding chacteristics of our nation.
Quote:4.) Freedom of ideology, religion, and cult of individuals and communities is guaranteed without any limitation in their demonstrations other than that which is necessary for the maintenance of public order protected by law. No one may be obliged to make a declaration regarding his ideology, religion, or beliefs. No religion shall have a state character. The public powers shall take into account the religious beliefs of Hanoverian society and maintain the appropriate relations of cooperation, with the formerly established Roman Catholic Church and other denominations.
The establishment of a state religion, no matter how benigh the form of that establishment, inherently disadvatages and marginalizes the followers of other faiths, as well as those of my own persausion who adhere to no religion or religious belief.
Being primarily a deist, I feel I cannot support an established church. Nevertheless, what can be done at this juncture?
Gentlemen:
Since Parliament is not in session, the Act cannot be repealed, but as stated above I would willingly resign if public opinion turns against the Church. Without an Archbishop, the Church would essentially disappear from the scene, and then I suppose the Act would be repealed by the next Parliament.
So far, two citizens have publicly opposed the Supremacy Act, and one has privately mentioned his opposition to me. Given how few people voted in favour of the Act in Parliament, this gives me serious concerns that the public might not support the measure. If a few more people voice their opposition, I will act as I mentioned above. The Church has no value if we have to force it on an unsupportive populus.
Sincerely,
+Christopher Bergensis
Really, I would consider going as far as relegating the church to the wastebasket as going too far in that direction...
Personally, I am of the opinion that it should exist...just not as a church of state. It's just that an established church creates a situtation where the church is superior to all other ideas (even where other ideas are tolerated, as Aderyn pointed out, it disadvantages adherents to other ideas to have an established church of state), when, in my personal opinion, individuals need to decide for themselves how to best honor the One that is All.
While I have personal objections to The Supremacy Act in which I have told the Archbishop, I would not oppose the Supremacy Act remaining in effect so that the Archbishop can demostrate the effectiveness of the Church. I hope that there will not be financial support of the Church from non members.