BCE and CE vs. BC and AD

[argio]

(Greeter) Bruce suggested I post this to the Apologetics Forum: Anyone else aggravated by the use of B.C.E. and C.E. in the Vatican II Weekday Missal? Published by Pauline Books and Media and Daughters of St. Paul, several commentaries include this politically correct dating in lieu of BC and AD. Is it ecumenism run amok? Why cater to the PC crowd in a Missal of all places?!

 

[Godfollower]

(Greeter) Bruce suggested I post this to the Apologetics Forum: Anyone else aggravated by the use of B.C.E. and C.E. in the Vatican II Weekday Missal? Published by Pauline Books and Media and Daughters of St. Paul, several commentaries include this politically correct dating in lieu of BC and AD. Is it ecumenism run amok? Why cater to the PC crowd in a Missal of all places?!

Yeah, I know how you feel, but it’s not a big deal; recall that scholars believe that Jesus was actually born a few years B.C. (or would that be B.C.E.)?

Another point: there’s no such thing as “Before Christ.”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The standard in the academic world is B.C.E. and C.E., the break points are the same as for BC and AD. I do not see anything wrong with using them as they are now the standard that is in use.

It is not ecumenism at all but the use of a standard that is accepted by everyone.

 

[Rolltide]

You could just do what some people do, and refer to them as (alternatively)

Before the Catholic Era / Catholic Era

OR

Before the Christian Era / Christian Era

Many academics are known to use the second formula!

 

[Nec5]

It’s just another way to distance/erase religious context in our lives. Was there really a compelling reason to do away with BC and AD? No.

 

[Axion]

It’s very sad that a Catholic organisation has misguidedly gone along with what can only be seen as another big attempt to de-Christianise society.

CE (Common Era), and BCE (Before Common Era), are nonsensical terms whose only purpose is to try to hide the fact that our dating system is based on Christ’s incarnation.

What is the “Common Era?” No one knows. It is just jargon, invented to avoid “offending” theoretical Atheists, Muslims and Buddhists supposedly outraged at actually having to use a calandar devised by Christians! Even practically the usage is bad - since CE and BCE are so easily confusable.

AD. Anno Domini/Year of our Lord, and
BC Before Christ
are the true designations of the system used now and for at least a thousand years. They bring the reality of the central event of this age into daily life. How stupid to conspire in attempts to cover it over for anti-Christian purposes.

 

[NHInsider]

It’s just another way to distance/erase religious context in our lives. Was there really a compelling reason to do away with BC and AD? No.

Yes. A frighteningly large percentage of the population (even among the churched) thought/think AD stands for After the Death (of Christ). In a world where it is no longer true that any educated person has at least a minimal working knowledge of Latin, the “AD” had come to be a source of confusion. Go into any random set of people under the age of 50 (mall, street-corner, local high school) and ask what “AD” stands for. (In fact, I think this was a Cash Cab question recently, and they got it wrong. . . )

And Yes again, because in fact the terms BCE and CE are more universal, not only in being not tied to the faith of one dominant religious group but in being less “Western” (they are still Western, obviously, since the original calendar was developed by the Church).

There are plenty of silly “pc” changes out there, and this may have begun as one of them, but there are good reasons for the Church Universal to adopt it.

 

[centurionguard]

The standard in the academic world is B.C.E. and C.E., the break points are the same as for BC and AD. I do not see anything wrong with using them as they are now the standard that is in use.

It is not ecumenism at all but the use of a standard that is accepted by everyone.

I do not see anything wrong with using them as they are now the standard that is in use.

Sure such lingo is in common usage. Purely humanistic relativism at best to persuade the ignorant from realizing the original Latin usage and it’s Christian significance.

I believe (“Axion”) put it appropriately when he stated:

What is the “Common Era?” No one knows. It is just jargon, invented to avoid “offending” theoretical Atheists, Muslims and Buddhists supposedly outraged at actually having to use a calandar devised by Christians! Even practically the usage is bad - since CE and BCE are so easily confusable.

 

[Nec5]

Yes. A frighteningly large percentage of the population (even among the churched) thought/think AD stands for After the Death (of Christ). In a world where it is no longer true that any educated person has at least a minimal working knowledge of Latin, the “AD” had come to be a source of confusion. Go into any random set of people under the age of 50 (mall, street-corner, local high school) and ask what “AD” stands for. (In fact, I think this was a Cash Cab question recently, and they got it wrong. . . )

And Yes again, because in fact the terms BCE and CE are more universal, not only in being not tied to the faith of one dominant religious group but in being less “Western” (they are still Western, obviously, since the original calendar was developed by the Church).

There are plenty of silly “pc” changes out there, and this may have begun as one of them, but there are good reasons for the Church Universal to adopt it.

So because people are uneducated and think AD=After Death rather than Anno Domini, then we should rename things? I doubt people will remember BCE either. That’s not a compelling reason.

And what’s so horrible about people equating AD with After Jesus’ death? It’s close enough in terms of years to be true, and it clearly references the death of Christ, which is the whole point with the AD/BC designation. Half the country think the British lost the US civil war, so changing terminology to accommodate the public is an endless procedure.

Renaming things is actually a poor historical approach. Because BC and AD have been in the cultural and historical lexicon for centuries, it has become a link to a major historical event. That in itself is a compelling reason to leave it alone because it represents a living link to the past for all those “uneducated” people you mentioned. If people wish to divorce themselves from Judeo-Christian heritage, then come out and argue for doing it. Don’t pretend it’s an attempt at objective universality.

The devil is clever to erase any and all formal traces of religious history. The real shame is the sheer number of Christians that fail to see this “death by a thousand cuts” approach.

 

[coracobb]

It’s very sad that a Catholic organisation has misguidedly gone along with what can only be seen as another big attempt to de-Christianise society.

CE (Common Era), and BCE (Before Common Era), are nonsensical terms whose only purpose is to try to hide the fact that our dating system is based on Christ’s incarnation.

What is the “Common Era?” No one knows. It is just jargon, invented to avoid “offending” theoretical Atheists, Muslims and Buddhists supposedly outraged at actually having to use a calandar devised by Christians! Even practically the usage is bad - since CE and BCE are so easily confusable.

AD. Anno Domini/Year of our Lord, and
BC Before Christ
are the true designations of the system used now and for at least a thousand years. They bring the reality of the central event of this age into daily life. How stupid to conspire in attempts to cover it over for anti-Christian purposes.

I agree wholeheartedly with you in al that you say. I’ve felt for a long time that it is just another way to take Christ out of our lives. Our holidays have become comercialised and have little to do with the reason for them. Before the Common Era is correct though in that the world has become more and more common through the years with little thought of Christ. I think BCE is a direct afront to the Christian faith.

Cora

 

[coracobb]

It’s very sad that a Catholic organisation has misguidedly gone along with what can only be seen as another big attempt to de-Christianise society.

CE (Common Era), and BCE (Before Common Era), are nonsensical terms whose only purpose is to try to hide the fact that our dating system is based on Christ’s incarnation.

What is the “Common Era?” No one knows. It is just jargon, invented to avoid “offending” theoretical Atheists, Muslims and Buddhists supposedly outraged at actually having to use a calandar devised by Christians! Even practically the usage is bad - since CE and BCE are so easily confusable.

AD. Anno Domini/Year of our Lord, and
BC Before Christ
are the true designations of the system used now and for at least a thousand years. They bring the reality of the central event of this age into daily life. How stupid to conspire in attempts to cover it over for anti-Christian purposes.

I agree whole heartedly with all that you said. BCE is just another way to remove all traces of Christ in our lives. The C which now stands for commom is true though, in that our world has become more and more common through the years.

Cora