Australia to remove BC and AD from school history books

The decision by the Australian government to ditch the Christian calendar in school history books has been met by anger.

Instead of BC (Before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini), the curriculum will use BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era) instead.

The change in abbreviations does not equate to a change in dates, but the Archbishop of Sydney the Most Rev Peter Jensen has described BCE and CE as “meaningless”.

He said the move yesterday was an “intellectually absurd attempt to write Christ out of human history”.

BCE and CE abbreviations have been in circulation for hundreds of years, but have become increasingly popular with scientists and academics in the last few decades.

According to the Daily Mail, the changes were supposed to be introduced next year but have been delayed because of the backlash.

Christopher Pyne, of the Liberal National Party, blamed political correctness for the change.

“Australia is what it is today because of the foundations of our nation in the Judeo-Christian heritage that we inherited from Western civilisation,” he said.

“Kowtowing to political correctness by the embarrassing removal of AD and BC in our national curriculum is of a piece with the fundamental flaw of trying to deny who we are as a people.” Via: xtian today

Views: 526

Comment by Daniel Clear on September 14, 2011 at 9:38am

maybe the answer would be to find some important event that actually happened 2011 years ago (on jan qst if there are accurate enough records) and use that event. you could then recalculate the correct date of jebus's birth (if such a thing can be done) and give the xtians that for their religious calendar while the rest of us use the correct system.


If it were not too much hassle to change the calendar completely, what would you pick as year 1? personally I think the best date would be from AD/CE 1543, the date coppernicus published

De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. I think that is possibly the most appropriate year as that's when we first understood what a year actually was but maybe others have a better suggestion?

Comment by Rob Todd on September 15, 2011 at 12:43am

It would be weird, since that would make this year  468 ce. I have no real objection to it, but it would be awfully inconvenient to use on a regular basis in america, since obviously most american are xtians, but it's not a bad idea to be used in the scientific community.

Comment by rhetrix on October 9, 2011 at 3:38pm

i've been using ce and bce in my classroom for years and I always have to explain it to my kids and i typically have to defend the reasoning behind such a system. . .


it is a shame that it's still based on a religious event, nut a wholesale switch to a new dating system, as opposed to just a new labeling system, is unlikely to happen. . .baby steps. . .


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service