According to the BBC, I was not born in 1950 AD but in 1950 CE. Julius Caesar was not assassinated in 44 BC but in 44 BCE. I guess my readers know what AD and BC stand for. CE, on the other hand, stands for Common Era and BCE stands for ‘Before the Common Era’.
European culture was born from a synthesis of faith and reason- Fr Joe Borg
The BBC said the new terms were a “religiously neutral” alternative to the ones used so far.
Had the BBC decided to do what the leaders of the French Revolution or Lenin did, that is, invent a new calendar dating the era from the setting up of the BBC perhaps, I could see a kind of logic in it.
However, the BBC did nothing of the sort. They still consider the birth of Jesus Christ as the dividing line between the two eras.
A possible attitude would be to ridicule using the same letters while saying that CE means Christ’s Era and BCW means Before Christ’s Era.
But perhaps the change should be seen within a wider perspective.
Lucetta Scaraffia, writing a front-page commentary in last Tuesday’s edition of L’Osservatore Romano was right to note that “to deny the historically revolutionary importance of the coming of Christ on earth, which is also accepted by those who do not recognise him as the son of God, is an act of enormous foolishness”.
Does this change reflect, as Scarfetta affirmed, a wider effort to “cancel every trace of Christianity from Western culture”?
There are signs of this effort even in Malta.
During a speech delivered in October 2010, Gozo Bishop Mario Grech was right to note there are many who are trying to limit the Church’s role to the private sphere.
“Some are insisting that Catholics in public offices act against their conscience.
“This anti-Christian attitude shows lack of respect for the right of religious liberty that even Christians should enjoy, and disregard forthe role of religion in the public sphere.”
Mgr Grech returned to this theme in a speech he delivered a few weeks ago on the occasion of the feast of the birthday of Our Lady; and he is right to keep on addressing this theme.
I take a very strong position against Catholics who want our politicians to do nothing except put into practice the wishes, whims and dictates of the Curia and the teachings of the Catechism.
But I take an equally strong position against those who want to drive the Church into the sacristy and Catholics into backrooms. Both confessionalism and laicism should be resisted.
We would be guilty of historical amnesia if we forget that Malta’s and all European culture was born from a synthesis of faith and reason.
Christianity, as Pope Benedict recently told German Parliamentarians, does not propose “a revealed law to the State and to society, that is to say, a juridical order derived from revelation. Instead, it has pointed to nature and reason as the true sources of law.”
It is incredible that in a culture which is highlighting the value of civil society you find people trying to stifle the voice of one of the largest components of civil society, namely the Church.
And I do not consider criticism as a way of stifling.
Even I, on more than one occasion, have criticised actions of the Church establishment. (See my most recent blog www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20111006/blogs/culture-conviction-and-compensation.388002, as an example).
However, the Church would be betraying our country if it does not do its best to influence the national agenda.
Quite naturally this should be done on the basis of reason and in a spirit dialogue in an atmosphere where different positions and opinions strive for the approval of the citizens.
joseph.borg@um.edu.mt