Malcolm Rivera
The phrase Year of Our Lord is present in Article VII of the US Constitution, dating the document to the seventeenth day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven. This phrase is not part of the Constitution itself, which ends at Article VII, and was not debated, ratified, or likely approved by the delegates. It was likely a formalism added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus, and was not viewed as having religious significance at the time. The US Constitution, despite its secular nature, uses this phrase as a standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s, reflecting the country's cultural heritage.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Is "Year of Our Lord" part of the Constitution? | No, it is not part of the Constitution itself, which ends at Article VII. |
| Is the phrase "Year of Our Lord" debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention? | No, it was likely a formalism added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus. |
| Did the "Year of Our Lord" phrase have any religious significance at the time? | No, it was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s and was not viewed as religious. |
| What is the significance of the phrase "Year of Our Lord"? | The phrase has no legal or historical value and is not required to be on documents. |
| Can the Constitution be considered a Christian document due to the phrase? | No, this argument is fallacious. The Constitution does not require a religious element. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- “Year of our Lord is not part of the Constitution
- The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention
- The phrase has no legal or historical value
- The phrase was a standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s
- The phrase is used to argue that the Constitution is a Christian document
“Year of our Lord is not part of the Constitution
The "Year of our Lord" phrase is not part of the US Constitution. The Constitution ends at Article VII, and the "Year of our Lord" phrase is appended to the attestation clause, which is not part of the legal document itself. The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention, and it was likely added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus, as a formality. The language was not considered to have any religious significance at the time.
The "Year of our Lord" phrase is an anachronistic dating convention that has been mostly discarded. It is not required on documents, and individuals can choose to omit it from their diplomas or certificates. The phrase has no legal or historical value and was not ratified by the nine-state minimum required by Article VII to be included in the Constitution.
The use of the phrase "Year of our Lord" in the Constitution has been used to argue that the document is Christian in nature. However, this argument is fallacious. The Constitution does not require a reference to God or the Bible, and the "Year of our Lord" phrase is not part of the official legal Constitution.
While the "Year of our Lord" phrase is not part of the US Constitution, it is important to note that some US state constitutions do include references to God. Additionally, the use of religious language in government documents and ceremonies, such as presidential inaugurations, is a separate issue that has evolved over time.
Fugitives and the Constitution: No Escape from Prosecution
You may want to see also
The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention
The phrase "Year of our Lord" is not part of the US Constitution itself, which ends at Article VII. The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention, and it seems unlikely that it was even approved by the delegates. The "Year of our Lord" phrase was probably a formalism unthinkingly appended by the scribe, Jacob Shallus. The language was not viewed as having any religious significance at the time.
The "Year of our Lord" phrase appears in the so-called Attestation Clause, which is the final part of the document where the founders witnessed it. This clause is not actually part of the Constitution. When the printed text of the Constitution was sent to the states for ratification, five of the first nine states that would ratify it only ratified the language preceding the date. In other words, they ratified the text only up to the final sentence in Article VII, and did not even consider the attestations of the witnesses because they didn't have that language in front of them.
The "Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. The European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers, and the American colonies, being established by Europeans, naturally inherited this practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. The dating phrase has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment.
The US Constitution takes a secular approach, and aside from the use of the phrase "the Year of our Lord" in Article VII, the Constitution does not mention a deity. The phrase has no real legal or historical value.
The Tech-Constitutional Question: What Rights Are at Stake?
You may want to see also
The phrase has no legal or historical value
The phrase "Year of our Lord" is an anachronistic dating convention that has been mostly discarded. It is not part of the official legal Constitution and holds no legal or historical value. The official Constitution's text ends with Article VII, and the "Year of our Lord" phrase was appended after this as part of the attestation clause.
The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention and was likely added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus, without any intention or understanding of religious significance. It is not part of the Constitution itself, and the document was intended to be secular, as demonstrated by the debate around its deliberate exclusions of religion.
The "Year of our Lord" phrase is similar to the words "so help me God" used in presidential inaugurations. Presidents are not required to utter these words but may choose to do so. The Constitution also does not require presidents to swear their oath of office on a Bible, but they may choose to, and most have.
The phrase "Year of our Lord" is not mentioned in any of the drafts of the Constitution and was not part of the text sent to the states for ratification. Five of the first nine states that ratified the Constitution only ratified the language preceding the date, meaning the "Year of our Lord" phrase was not considered or approved by them.
The inclusion of this phrase in the final document was likely an unthinking formality, and it holds no legal or historical weight.
Foreign Policy: What Does the Constitution Really Say?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The phrase was a standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s
The use of the phrase "Year of our Lord" in the US Constitution has been a topic of debate. The phrase appears in Article VII, dating the Constitution to "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty-seven." This dating formula was a standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s, and its use was more ritualistic than religious.
During the time, it was common for documents to be dated using the birth of Christ as a reference point, reflecting the cultural and historical context of the time. This practice was inherited from the European tradition of dating years in this manner. However, it is important to note that the phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention, and it was likely added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus, as a formalism.
The inclusion of "Year of our Lord" in the Constitution has been interpreted by some as an indication of the document's Christian nature. However, this argument is fallacious. The Constitution itself does not require the use of religious wording, and the phrase has no legal or historical value. Attorneys seeking admission to the US Supreme Court, for example, can choose whether they want the phrase included on their admission certificate.
Additionally, when the printed text of the Constitution was sent to the states for ratification, five of the first nine states only ratified the language preceding the date. This means that the phrase "Year of our Lord" and the witnesses' attestations were not legally ratified according to the requirements of Article VII.
In conclusion, while the phrase "Year of our Lord" appears in the US Constitution, its inclusion was likely a standard dating practice of the time rather than a deliberate religious statement. The phrase has no legal or historical significance and does not imply that the Constitution is a Christian document.
The Heart of the Constitution: The Most Important Clause
You may want to see also
The phrase is used to argue that the Constitution is a Christian document
The United States Constitution is a secular document that does not mention a deity or make references to God. The only exception is the use of the phrase "the Year of our Lord" in Article VII, which dates the Constitution as being drafted "in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty-seven".
The phrase "the Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s and was included in the Constitution's final draft by its scribe, Jacob Shallus. The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention, and it is unlikely that it held any religious significance at the time. The language was not part of the Constitution's earlier drafts, and five of the first nine states that ratified the Constitution only ratified the text up to the final sentence of Article VII, which does not include the "Year of our Lord" phrase.
Despite this, the phrase "the Year of our Lord" is occasionally used to argue that the Constitution is a Christian document. However, this argument is fallacious. The phrase was a formalism that was included without much thought, and the dating system used in the Constitution is simply an historical artifact of Western culture, inherited from the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ.
The absence of religious references in the Constitution is notable, especially when compared to the Declaration of Independence, which contains multiple references to God. The lack of religious language in the Constitution suggests that its drafters took a more secular approach, intending to create a document that did not favor any particular religion.
In conclusion, while the phrase "the Year of our Lord" appears in the Constitution, it does not carry any legal or historical weight. The Constitution is a secular document, and the inclusion of this phrase is not indicative of any religious agenda or intention.
Federal vs US Constitution: What's the Difference?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the phrase "the Year of our Lord" is not part of the Constitution itself, which ends at Article VII. The phrase was not debated or ratified by the Constitutional Convention and was likely added by the scribe, Jacob Shallus, as a formality.
The use of the phrase "the Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s. Its use was ritualistic and not religious, and it is doubtful that it was given any legal significance at the time.
The phrase "the Year of our Lord" has no legal or historical value and was not viewed as having any religious significance when the Constitution was written. It is an artefact of the European dating system, which dates years from the birth of Christ.
