Skip to comments.The Year of Our Lord: Christian Phrase Still Used on State Documents (GAG ALERT!!!)
Posted on 04/25/2010 12:04:16 PM PDT by Baladas
A few days ago, I got curious about the wording of those proclamations issued by several state governors announcing Confederate History Month. (Mostly, I wondered why a patriotic current citizen of the United States of America would want to celebrate what were unarguably the deadliest traitors in our nation's history.)
As I found examples of the proclamations online, I was struck by some of what I'd consider the "boilerplate," the way the date of issuance is described. Here's how the governor of Georgia did it:
"In witness thereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the Executive Department to be affixed this 1st day of December in the year of our Lord two thousand nine."
(Excerpt) Read more at politicsdaily.com ...
I am a Yankee, though not by birth. I think the Union position was correct in the Civil War. But reading this statement was non-sequitur for me.
A statement like that brands this person as a raging idiot.
I loved how immediately Mr. Weiss went running to the ACLU about this.
The Confederates traitors? The author of the article needs to read some history and I don’t mean modern rehashing, or some program on PBS, but the original words of people involved.
Sure, many Northerners considered the Confederates traitors, but then why didn’t they follow through, and hang anybody on these grounds? Probably because they would have lost the cases in court.
You also find in history that before the War of 1812, New England almost left the Union. A couple of generations later, they were calling others traitors for trying (more successfully) to do the same thing!
There is a book on this subject: Albert Taylor Bledsoe, Was Davis a Traitor; or Was Secession a Constitutional Right Prior to the War of 1861? Published in 1907. Available free on line at Google Books:
Correction: the title if the book is “Is Davis a Traitor...”
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
"We, therefore the Representatives of the United States of America, . . . appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World . . ."
"With a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
... 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 In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names, ...
This phrase is in Article 7 of the Constitution (am I wrong?):
“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. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.”
If they don’t like the language, move to another country.
‘...”CE” for “AD”...’
When and if I use “CE” I mean it to stand for “Christian Era”.
Actually, he quotes Article VII of the Constitution in the article. It’s the Declaration of Independence that he says doesn’t have the wording.
On the other hand, in a country based on non-Christian traditions, like Israel, or even Jews (or Buddhists, Hindus, etc.) that don't acknowledge Jesus as Lord or Savior, CE is appropriate.
I guess I just don't know why people seem to get their panties in a bunch over this.
Gee I guess he’s never read many of our federal documents?
As Y2K approached my bank ceased printing a “19” on the date line of my checks.
So beginning on January 1, A.D. 2000, I started prefacing the year with “A.D.” on every check I wrote, as an “in your face” to the political correctness folks.
No one has refused to take my checks.
Everyone knows it’s the Year of The One.
Some still won’t admit our Founders put God in the Constitution.
in Article VII of the U.S. Constitution: "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
There could be a Constitutional question here. This is not like "In God We Trust," which courts have ruled is not promoting any specific religion. "Year of our Lord" is as Christian as a crucifix. Does the exclusive use of that language constitute a government endorsement of Christianity?He admits that "the Year of our Lord" is in the Constitution. He just thinks that the Constitution is unconstitutional. He would have a case if the people who ratified the First Amendment intended the establishment clause to forbid that usage. But apparently - he admits also that nobody complained before him - nobody at the time of the ratification of the First Amendment, or even in all the time since, up 'til now, has thought the way he wished they had.
Whatever else that "the Year of our Lord" phrase in the Constitution means, it means that - deny it who will - in 1787 American culture had far too much Christian influence for anyone to be willing to stand against the use of the phrase.
Or more importantly, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The concept that rights are from God alone, and therefore inalianable....NOT a gift of government, is the basis of a free republic. The rejection of that concept, by the legal and political elites in America, is why liberty is now slipping away.
Yeah, the author blew it, big time.