Posted on 10/05/2011 10:26:09 PM PDT by Steelfish
Vatican Attacks BBC's 'Senseless Hypocrisy' The Vatican has condemned the BBC’s suggestion that religiously “neutral” terms should be used instead of “BC” and “AD” during discussions of history on air.
The BBC denied that it was official policy for producers to adopt the “neutral” terms By Tim Ross, 05 Oct 2011
The semi-official newspaper of the Holy See, L’Osservatore Romano, described the guidance from the BBC’s ethics advisers as “enormous nonsense” and accused the broadcaster of “senseless hypocrisy”.
The guidelines suggested that the modern phrases “the common era” and “before the common era” should be considered as potential replacements for Anno Domini and Before Christ to avoid offending non-Christians.
Some of the corporation’s highest profile presenters reacted with dismay and promised to ignore the idea.
The row erupted last month after the guidance emerged on the religion pages of the BBC website, which stated: "As the BBC is committed to impartiality it is appropriate that we use terms that do not offend or alienate non-Christians.
"In line with modern practice, BCE/CE (Before Common Era/Common Era) are used as a religiously neutral alternative to BC/AD.”
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Good on you, Vatican.
The irony belongs to the notion that Christ is common.
Why should Rome complain, if the two things actually are equivalent.
The irony concerns the Left’s normalization of Christ as a unifying, “common” calender reference.
If the BBC referred to (say) Illinois as “State 32”, I think people would complain.
Even though these two things are equivalent, one is a name and the other is simply a marker.
So it is with BC/AD and BCE/CE. One states the truth that Christ has split history in two, whereas the other form is just a soulless temporal marker.
OK, some FReepers do not believe in Christ - but the Pope does. So he’s obviously right to fight for BC/AD.
Hope this was helpful.
I always tell antitheists that BCE and CE stand for “Before Christian Era” and “Christian Era”.
“In line with modern practice, BBBC (Before BBC) is used as a religiously neutral alternative to BC/AD.”
“In line with modern practice, BM (Before Mohammed or BM, Bowel Movement, same thing) is used as a religiously neutral alternative to BC/AD.”
Might as well not say “St. Louis” or “San Francisco”.
B.C. and A.D. are nomenclature of Western Civilization which is rooted in Christianity.
I hate to sound ignorant, but what is a “common era” and what event happened that created and started the “common era?” If the answer is ‘the birth of Christ’, just say it—BEFORE CHRIST and AFTER CHRIST. How can a historical event be offensive to some people? Accept the truth and STFU.
The disturbing trend is godless secularism marginalizing christian common usage elements in the common language of our culture and in society.
If California cities were named today, we would certainly not have Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, San Jose etc etc.
Christian related names and usages in language enrich our culture.
I don’t know why the Vatican even acknowledges a Western country where it is still against the law for a Catholic to sit on the throne (in 2011); Britain is like Saudi Arabia (and they look more like them every day).
“I don’t know why the Vatican even acknowledges a Western country where it is still against the law for a Catholic to sit on the throne (in 2011); Britain is like Saudi Arabia (and they look more like them every day).”
Perhaps because the Vatican understands that Britain makes it’s own laws through parliamentary democracy and as a sovreign country has the right to do so. Perhaps the Vatican also understands that the UK is officially a Christian country, with its’ own official Christian church of whom our head of state is also defender of the faith and the head of that church. The Vatican also probably appreciates that in our parliament sit the 26 lords spiritual who get to vote on all UK legislation that goes before the lords, ensuring that christianity and our church are always represented in the laws governing this officially christian country. So yes, you’re right, we’re just like Saudi Arabia really. . . . . . .
All quite the opposite of a secular country like the US whose constitution demands the separation of church and state and insists on removing God from every public sector it can, which is presumably why you’ve ended up with a muslim president.
Anh what about all those bigoted countries where the monarch MUST be a Catholic. Do they get a pass?
“our head of state is also defender of the faith and the head of that church”
That’s like an Ayatollah, right?
Even the title was taken from the hated Catholic Church...
“Anh what about all those bigoted countries where the monarch MUST be a Catholic. Do they get a pass?”
Of course; they represent God.
No they don’t.
“That’s like an Ayatollah, right?
Even the title was taken from the hated Catholic Church...”
No, more like the pope really, but with fewer child abuse cover-ups.
‘Hated’ catholic church? No-one I know hates the catholic church and the British governemnt spends billions funding thousands of catholic faith schools right across the UK. The reason the ‘no catholics as sovereign’ rule was introduced because certain mediterranean countries kept building up vast armies, putting them on boats and sending them to England to kill people because they didn’t like us worshipping God our way. As soon they stopped doing that we started getting on again, we just never got round to changing the law.
Maybe if you flicked the chip off your shoulder, you might be able to start hating the real enemies of your country, rather than its’ staunchest ally. :)
Britain is an ally; Australia is our staunchest.
Stop hatin’
“Britain is an ally; Australia is our staunchest.
Stop hatin’”
They’re our staunchest ally too, must be something to do with HM Queen Elizabeth II being their head of state and our good Aussie friends voting to keep it that way. :)
The only person I can see ‘hatin’ is you, but then my family is half catholic so I get a good perspective on these things.
Australia helped in the war in Vietnam, even staying after we’d left. True allies...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.