Vatican newspaper criticizes BBC change to 'common era' dating

[The Straight Story]

Vatican newspaper criticizes BBC change to 'common era' dating

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican newspaper said it was "historically senseless hypocrisy" for the BBC to drop the dating abbreviations B.C. and A.D. on the grounds that they might offend non-Christians.

In a front-page commentary Oct. 4, L'Osservatore Romano said the change reflected a wider effort to "cancel every trace of Christianity from Western culture."

The British media corporation recently announced it would replace B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini, or Year of the Lord) with B.C.E. (Before Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era.) It said the new terms were a "religiously neutral" alternative.

The Vatican newspaper added its voice to a growing number of critics, who have noted that the new dating abbreviations still use the birth of Christ as a reference point, but without acknowledging the connection.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1103919.htm

[MineralMan]

1. If I were the BBC, I'd change it to "Before Catholicism."

That is all.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. That would indicate a date hundreds of years later than

the one that is needed as 'year one'. Does not work, because Catholicism came to be some years into the Common Era.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. it would move "year 1" to the date of the Nicean Council. nt

[MineralMan]

51. It was a joke.

:eyes:

[truebrit71]

2. I'm sort of split on this one...part of me thinks that we should leave it BC/AD

..simply because it's the way it's always been done and that this BCE/CE is PC run amuck, and another part is sort of fine with it...I mean I suppose there are people out there that get all wound up because it's not BSM (before spaghetti monster) and ASM (after spaghetti monster), but the idea that it is all part of some "wider effort to cancel every trace of christianity from western culture" suggests that someone needs to switch to decaff...

[xocet]

46. BSM/ ASM?

How does one convert from the BC/AD system to the BSM/ASM system?

Does the offset vary with the global population of pirates by chance?

[RC]

3. What does Christianism have that other religions do not have?

Besides unChrist like behavior of the church leaders?

[Mac1949]

9. The world's most powerful PR machine?

;)

[MineralMan]

52. Oh, about a third of the world's population.

2/3 isn't Christian. :shrug:

[marmar]

4. Another fine whine from the west side of the Tiber.

nt

[Nye Bevan]

5. Is there anyone who is really offended by "BC" and "AD"?

After all, I don't worship Janus, the Roman God of the Doorway, which the month of January is named after. But I don't object to January being called January.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January

[NYC Liberal]

6. The Romans aren't around anymore and nobody believes in their gods.

That's the difference.

[Ikonoklast]

18. May The Almighty Jupiter Smite You For Your Insolence.

Last time I was there, I saw *lots* of Romans.

They drive like lunatics.

[hobbit709]

30. You should see the way they drive in Naples.

[NYC Liberal]

32. Thor is way cooler than Jupiter!

[msanthrope]

37. Best Thor picture, ever---

[RC]

39. +10

[LibertyLover]

48. I take it that you have never heard of Pagans or the various

reconstructionist religious groups? Yes, there are some of us who actual do believe in the Romans' gods.

[panzerfaust]

10. Yep. It ain't the "Year of My Lord" 2011

Even the oceans of blood shed in the name of THEIR Lord by Christians does not justify forcing all to kneel before their imaginary guy.

However, recognizing that the spread of Christian imperialism across the globe, destroyed peoples and disrupted their calendars, it is reasonable to recognize the Common Era 2011 - which helps to keep the world on the same page.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/__9OOS_Sr1Gk/SW8eD3DawyI/AAAAAAAAAek/mK7cHxm2ibY/s400/Burning+of+Anton+Ijsbarts+Tielt+1573.jpg
True Christians burning Heretics (Anabaptists being the burned)

Such violent cruelty and intolerance need not be recalled in the very naming of our years: Savage superstition needs to be put behind us.

[Nye Bevan]

13. er.... OK. Not sure that using "BC" and "AD" is actually "forcing all to kneel",

but you obviously feel very strongly about this.

[MineralMan]

12. Offended? Not really. But, I prefer the Common Era system.

Not everyone is a Christian, it seems, so the reference to Christ is sort of stupid, really. We all pretty much use the same calendar system, so we might as well use terminology that reflects that usage. I can see no drawbacks to the Common Era designation. What are your objections to it?

[Nye Bevan]

14. I really don't care, but I don't see the point. To me it's like changing the name of St. Paul, MN,

on the grounds that St. Paul is a Christian Saint and not everyone is Christian. Wouldn't the same people who are highly offended at the use of "BC" be equally offended at living in a city named for a Christian Saint?

[MineralMan]

45. Oh, dear. I'm not "highly offended"

by any of this. It seems the only ones who are "highly offended" are those who are upset by the use of BCE and CE. Nobody else really seems to care all that much.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. I have ALWAYS been offended by it. At least since I was ten or so,

and starting to figure out that god was the grown-ups Santa Claus. I remember refusing to put AD and BC in history papers in Jr High, using instead the simple year or negative year ("Julius Caesar died in -44.") It is not like January or Wednesday, which are simply named for long-discarded gods, but it is a designation which dedicates the entire calendar to one particular god and in effect gives that god dominion over it for believers and non-believers alike. It is a very parochial attitude.

Why should Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Animists, Scientologists, Raelians, and atheists give obeisance to a god they don't believe in by annotating dates with "In the Year of Our Lord" - Anno Dominae?

[Nye Bevan]

16. So you probably want San Francisco to be renamed, too.

After all, it is named after Saint Francis of Assisi, a venerated Christian Saint, which forces its residents to give obeisance to the Christian religion.

You can always find something new to get outraged about whenever you get bored.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. OK. Suppose you, as a christian, lived somewhere like, say, Burm,a,

and were forced to date all correspondence, official documents with "In the Year Of My Lord Buddha,,,"

That's wouldn't be a problem for you?

What does the name of a city have to do with anything? Like the name of a month or day, as above, it is meaningless. But when I date something as "The Year of Our Lord" and it is NOT MY LORD, that makes me a liar. If I was a believe in another faith, it would also make me a blasphemer.

Does your god require people to lie and blaspheme in his name?

[Nye Bevan]

22. When you write "AD", you don't think about "the Lord"

any more than you think about Saint Francis of Assisi when you write "San Francisco".

And like me, I don't think my God gives a shit either way.

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. Wrong. YOU don't think that.

I do. Because it is not the Anno of MY Dominae. I am always acutely aware of it.

The culture of the majority NEVER thinks about the effect of that culture on the minority.

Again, place names for historical or mythological figure do not imply worship of those figures. I could live in Stalingrad without deifying Stalin. The fact that SF was established as a Franciscan monastary in the 17th or 18th century does not require I become a monk.

And your god DOES give a shit. It is the first commandment - thou shalt have no other god before me. If you use "in the Year of My Lord Buddha" in your correspondence, you are in violation of the first commandment.

And you will be damned to hell, to burn for eternity for your apostasy. (by your own religion's edicts)

[Nye Bevan]

28. "Place names for historical or mythological figure do not imply worship of those figures".

I agree with you entirely.

I would also say:

"year numberings for historical or mythological figure do not imply worship of those figures".

But for some reason place names are fine, but year numberings will cause me to be "damned to hell".

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. So, you go around claiming Buddha to be your god? nt

[Nye Bevan]

31. No, but I *do* postively affirm the Christian Sainthood of the venerated Francis of Assisi

every time I write the words "San Francisco".

Christian-haters really should make a point of saying only "Frisco". And also uber-PC types like the BBC. After all, it's like having a city named "The Esteemed Prophet Muhammed". Would the Christian Right really allow that?

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. You are being deliberately obtuse -

there is nothing universally inclusive about a place name. What associations there are, are historical Francis of Assisi existed. He is venerated by Catholics as a saint. No demand is made of me in acknowledging that he existed.

Anno Dominae, the year of OUR lord, does make a demand on me. It automatically, by its own language, includes me in acknowledging a god I do not believe in. Now, if there was a phrase that said "In the Year of THEIR Lord", that would be different.

It is a christian egotism that there should be a Muslim Calendar, a Jewish Calendar, and THE calendar. Unless you acknowledge that THE calendar is in reality the CHRISTIAN calendar, you will never understand what I'm saying.

Then again, perhaps you do understand and are simply a christian bigot.

[Nye Bevan]

40. You don't have to write "A.D." If you just write a year number, the "A.D." is implied.

And most historians concur that there was a historical Christ, so "B.C." should present no problem.

[RaleighNCDUer]

43. No, most CHRISTIAN historians concur that there was a historical Christ.

There is absolutely NO historical non-biblical evidence that he ever existed. The one mention, in Josephus, has been shown by analysts to have been inserted into his text in the 3rd century - presumably by a christian monk scribe.

And why would any non-christian chose to date anything from the supposed birth of Christ?

That, BTW, is also a fallacy - IF he existed, he would have been born in 3 BCE, in the spring, based on the actual, historical data of the Augustan census and biblical text, not in the year 1, on Dec. 25 (the Celebration of the Sun, and holy day of the rival Mithraic mysteries). Therefore CE and BCE are more accurate, in that it is an agreed upon arbitrary date, not connected with any event.

And when I write, I write CE. As you said, the AD is implied UNLESS you write something which is NOT AD. And THAT is the whole point of the article - a christian institution trying to preserve a christian prerogative of including people who do not wish to be included in their reckoning.

[Nye Bevan]

44. Seriously? You put "CE" on your checks? (nt)

[Union Scribe]

41. ....must have been a fun kid...

[Bill McBlueState]

17. post 15 aside,

I don't think that many people are "offended" by BC and AD.

I *prefer* CE and BCE because there's no reference to a specific religion, and I think it makes sense for secular publications to use those instead of the religious terms, but it certainly doesn't offend me if they don't.

[Lucian]

25. I am.

And asking that kind of question is highly insensitive. It's like asking people if they get offended by black jokes or if they get offended by sex jokes.

Just because YOU don't find problems with it doesn't mean others don't.

[treestar]

53. +1

And when does the Common Era start? And why? Hardly makes a difference.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Calling BCE and CE 'new terms' is incorrect

Those terms have been in use for a long time. Nations that are not Christian majority do not really feel the need to mark history using Christian terms. I learned these 'new terms' in 1974. I always use them when context calls for it, which means anything that is seen by the world at large as opposed to private communications. It is not hard to comprehend that if the terms were BP and AP, Before the Prophet Mohammad and After, some Christians would be upset and foot stomping like mad. So do unto others and all.
As it was pointed out to me, the 'new terms' were selected in part so that Christian people could, if they wished, say 'Before the Christian Era' for BCE. The initials remained the same. It is also worth mentioning that BBC policy is that either set of initials can be used, it is not an edict of forced change, it is the allowance of the use of both terms.
The Vatican, as always, is behind the times and whining about meaningless things.

[RZM]

36. Exactly

That system has been used for a long time, specially by historians, who are the ones that matter most in this debate.

[panzerfaust]

11. Dup:

Sorry. First post (above: Yep. It ain't the "Year of My Lord" 2011) came back with a "your post was not successful error). Then both showed up.

[DirkGently]

19. Points to the BBC for accuracy. Christianity doesn't define history.

[Union Scribe]

38. Except, it's still the same system.

Turns out it does, in fact, define history.

[DirkGently]

42. Changing the nomenclature's a good first step to chucking the whole bag of nonsense.

[dembotoz]

23. does this mean my wireless contract will go on longer????

[Lucian]

24. The Vatican is just upset because they know they're becoming increasingly insignificant.

Good for the BBC.

[truebrit71]

34. Good point....

...

[hunter]

27. Time Zero translates to 00:00 January 1, 1970 UTC

That might be a good place to end the "Common Era."

We should get rid of leap seconds too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_time

For day-to-day human use a lunisolar calendar with uncounted days would be nice. The uncounted days would be a holidays, and on those days the use of money would be banned. Every transaction of goods or services would be a gift.

Ah, if only I was Emperor of Earth...

[Marrah_G]

35. Pretty sure most of England doesn't give a shit what Pope Prada thinks.

[LibertyLover]

47. I subscribe to Biblical Archeology Review

and they have an editorial policy of leaving whatever dating abbreviations their articles' authors have used without changing them. Some of the more amusing "cancel my subscription" letters in recent years have been on this same topic. No matter how often the magazine's editors explain their policy, some right-wing fundy whack job, who usually says in his or her correspondence that the reason they subscribed in the first place was because the magazine's title had "Biblical" in it, metaphorically jumps up and down and predicts doom, DOOM, DOOOOOOOMMMMMMM.

[hifiguy]

49. It is, in the words of that great philosopher

Bugs Bunny, to laugh. :rofl:

[HighContext]

50. Christianity has no part in our time telling. Buh-Bye!

:hi:

[Puregonzo1188]

54. "cancel every trace of Christianity from Western culture."

Sounds like a good idea to me.