Sunday, April 23, 2006

Background On A.D. vs. C.E. Labeling For Historical Dates

I recently posted a story on the debate over the Kentucky Board of Education’s decision to begin using C.E. and B.C.E. along with B.C. and A.D. in teaching historical dates. Here is some additional background. (Sources include Wikipedia, and April 2005 Washington Times.)

The practice of referring to years in relation to the date of the birth of Jesus was originated by a Scythian Monk, Dionysius Exiguus, in Rome in 525. It came into common use in the 8th century. Historians now agree the Exiguus was a few years off in setting the year of Jesus’ birth. Jesus appears to have in fact been born between 4 and 8 B.C. (B.C.E.) Pope Gregory continued using the B.C./A.D. designations when he created the Gregorian calendar in 1582. The notations have always been a low level source of irritation to non-Christians, reminding them that Western civilization defines itself in Christian terms. Particularly the use of A.D. ("in the year of our Lord"), not just "after Christ", seems to require the user to proclaim a religious acceptance of Christianity. Jewish scholars for over a century have used. C.E. (common era) and B.C.E. (before the common era) in their work.

The leaders of the French Revolution attempted to introduce a dating system that counted years from the beginning of the "Republican Era", i.e. the day the First French Republic was proclaimed. In the United States, dating of official documents from the date of the Declaration of Independence, along with the use of A.D., was a practice that was sometimes used. The Constitution of the United States concludes with the following:
Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth.
It was only in the 1990's that a movement began to use C.E. and B.C.E. more generally. The United States Supreme Court recognizes the problem that the notation poses for some attorneys. Its instruction form for applicants for admission to the Supreme Court bar tells attorneys how to request a certificate of admission reflecting the date of the lawyer’s admission without the accompanying phrase "in the year of our Lord".

In 2000, the Southern Baptist Convention adopted the following Resolution opposing the secularization of dates, and at the same time reflecting why use of the traditional system is problematic for non-Christians:
WHEREAS, Historically, our (Gregorian) calendar marked the centrality of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus by the designation B.C. (before Christ) and A.D. (anno Domini…); and WHEREAS, Some recent publishing practices alter this designation in favor of B.C.E. … and C.E….; and WHEREAS, This practice is the result of the secularization, anti-supernaturalism, religious pluralism, and political correctness pervasive in our society. WHEREAS, The traditional method of dating is a reminder of the preeminence of Christ and His gospel in world history; and WHEREAS, This retention is a reminder to those in this secular age of the importance of Christ’s life and mission and emphasizes to all that history is ultimately His Story.

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention…, encourage Southern Baptist individuals, churches, entities, and institutions to retain the traditional method of dating and avoid this revisionism.