Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

6 posts ยท Mar 19 2000 to Mar 20 2000

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 16:41:46 -0500

Subject: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

Someone mentioned the "New Anglican" state....

Sorry to hack at an old point, but the NAC has *nada* (AFAIK) to do with
Anglicans! It is New Anglian (as in East Anglia, a region of England IIRC).

<Hopes he is right>

(On another topic, weren't the Light Horsemen the early 20th century
equivalent of what would have, in other times, been called Hobilars -
infantry that rides horses to battle?)

Tom

From: Popeyesays@a...

Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 18:45:32 EST

Subject: Re: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

In a message dated 3/19/00 3:42:25 PM Central Standard Time,
> Thomas.Barclay@sofkin.ca writes:

<< On another topic, weren't the Light Horsemen the early 20th century
 equivalent of what would have, in other times, been called Hobilars -
infantry that rides horses to battle? >>

More properly Dragoons in the renaissance, Thirty Years War and ECW sense.

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:18:42 +1000

Subject: Re: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

> Thomas.Barclay wrote:

Yes, you're right. But Anglican/Episcopalianism is probably the official
state religion, not that anyone in the NAC actually cares about this. Heck,
they've probably merged with the Catholics by 2100.

> (On another topic, weren't the Light Horsemen the early 20th century

Yes, good call. "Mobile Infantry"

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 19:04:04 -0800

Subject: Re: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

> Thomas.Barclay wrote:

Dragoon may be a better term.

Bye for Now,

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 22:18:23 -0500

Subject: Re: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:18:42 +1000, Alan E and Carmel J Brain
> <aebrain@dynamite.com.au> wrote:

> Yes, you're right. But Anglican/Episcopalianism is probably the

If it follows the US/Canada model, it won't have a state religion. Lots
of Anglicans in the NAC, but lots of Presbyterians, too. The United Church
(mix of Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational) is, I believe, the
largest protestent sect in Canada. There are a lot of Baptists in the US.
Quebec is
heavily Catholic (as would be the Cal-Tex nation, actually) and there
are quite a few Catholic jurisdictions throughout the US. (particularly in the
major northern cities). Don't forget the Mormons in Utah, and how they'd feel
about a "state religion"...

Jon's universe doesn't cover immigration much, but there are a lot of Asian
immigrants in Canada. Add Buddhism, and Hindu, to name just a few. For that
matter, there are enclaves of voodoo worship that are entrenched in North
America (what DID happen to the Caribbean Islands, anyway, in the
Tuffleyverse?).

I don't see the NAC having a formal state religion at all, whether or not
anyone cares. Trying to define a state religion would shatter the NAC. In
fact, I see the NAC as probably the most multicultural of all the future
nations in the Tuffleyverse.

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:54:19 +0100

Subject: Re: Sorry, no New Anglicans allowed

> Thomas.Barclay wrote:

> Sorry to hack at an old point, but the NAC has *nada* (AFAIK) to do

It is indeed. The part of England Jon T. lives in, to be more exact -
which might have something to do with his choice of super-power names.
Or it might not, I dunno <g>

Later,