Baby Rose By Any Other Name . . .

baby. . . would still have stinky diapers. 馃槢

‘Kay, yesterday at Mass they had three babies baptized, and it reminded me that a while back someone wrote and asked about whether it is required to give saint names to babies. (Sorry for the delay in answering.)

As the reader recognized, there would be problems with having a strict, saint-name-only policy. In particular, it would make it impossible to get new names into the system, and that would be a special problem in newly evangelized lands, where the saint names would all be foreign.

So what’s the scoop?

Well, here’s what the 1917 Code of Canon Law had to say about the matter:

Canon 761

Pastors should take care that a Christian name is given to those whom they baptize; but if they are not able to bring this about, they will add to the name given by the parents the name of some Saint and record both names in the book of baptisms.

Pretty sneaky, eh? If the parents refuse to slap a saint name on the kid, the priest was to do it in spite of them, and perhaps behind their backs to keep them from being alienated from the Church.

Now note that, strictly speaking, the requirement wasn’t that the kid be given a saint name. It was that he be given “a Christian name.” This was understood to include not only the names of saints but also other pious names, such as the virtues (Faith, Hope, Charity, Modesty, Chastity, Prudence). The great majority of the time, though, having “a Christian name” meant having a saint name.

If, however, the pastor couldn’t get the parents to agree to “a Christian name,” he was to slap a saint name on the kid in spite of the parents’ wishes. You could see why parents would get honked off at this practice.

And so it’s no surprise that the law don’t say that no mo. Here’s what the 1983 Code of Canon Law says:

Canon 855

Parents, sponsors, and the pastor are to take care that a name foreign to Christian sensibility is not given.

Now the shoe is on the other foot! The pastor doesn’t have the obligation (or authority) to name a child in spite of the parents. He and the parents, with the sponsors, have the joint obligation not to pick a name “foreign to Christian sensibility.” It doesn’t have to be a Christian name, it just can’t be contrary to Christian sensibility.

If the text had said that it couldn’t be foreign to Christian tradition then it would have to be a name that has some kind of resonance in Christian history, but since the text said that it can’t be foreign to Christian sensibility the law opens the door to things that have not previously been found in Christian tradition.

Further, what parents name their children is usually something they feel strongly about, and pastors (at least those informed about the law) will generally be reluctant to challenge parents as long as the proposed name at least arguably doesn’t violate it.

This gives pretty wide latitude. About the only names you couldn’t give your kid would be things that would be clearly offensive (e.g., “God,” “Satan”) or perhaps deliberately bizarre (e.g., “Moon Unit,” “Motor Head”).

Even in these areas one must tread with some care, because different cultures (and people from those cultures) will consider different things offensive. For example, the popular Spanish name “Jesus” is not offensive (so you can name your child “Jesus”, but not “God”). You might not be able to name your kid “Satan,” but you could name him “Judas” (after Judas Maccabeus or the apostle Judas mentioned in John 14:22 and specifically distinguished from Judas Iscariot; this Judas not-Iscariot may be be Simon the Zealot under another name).

There’s even biblical precedent for including the name of a pagan god in Christian tradition, for one of St. Paul’s evangelist associates was named “Apollos.” In families of Scandinavian origin, even the name “Thor” might be argued to have been received into Christian tradition; there have been a lot of Christians named that in Scandinavia, such as the explorer Thor Heyerdahl (though if the parents were neo-pagans the name clearly would not be permissible, but then the usually wouldn’t being presenting the child for Christian baptism).

A lot of contemporary names that are made-up just to sound pretty also probably could pass muster under this canon, especially if they are pretty–beauty being in the eye of the parental beholder. Only in the most extreme cases would many pastors be inclined to challenge parents on the grounds that the name they made up to give their child is awful-sounding, though Slartibartfast might get challenged, at least on grounds of imprudence if not offensiveness.

A real test would be whether ESPN McCall could get baptized with that name. It’d be harder to argue that the name EWTN McCall would be contrary to Christian sensibilities, especially if the parents had a moving testimonial about how the network saved them from a life of sin and converted them to Christ. 馃槈

Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."

14 thoughts on “Baby Rose By Any Other Name . . .”

  1. Of course, then you have the opposite tendency, hyper-Catholic families, whose names, when read in sequence, sound like the Roman Canon.
    I succeeded in getting Augustine for the first one. For the second I’m working on Aurelius, i.e. St. Augustine’s first name. Getting it past the better half, of course, is the key.

  2. Another example of a good tradition legislated away. Considering that a Christian name could be a middle name, having people give their kid a patron saint, or an explictly Christian name, is hardly a glaring imposition. Name’s mean something; as is abundantly clear from Holy Scripture, where the designation of a name is often attended with great solemnity, and momentous consequences. Given the history, I’d think chosing a name for some frivilous reason, and not attending to the communion of saints and the Christian reality, is itself foreign to the Christian sensibility. Of course a doubtful law does lot oblige. Hurray.

  3. Reminds me of a story:
    The priest refuses to baptise a baby because the father wants the baby named ‘Toyota’. When the father asks the reason for the refusal, the priest says (with heroic patience) ‘because Toyota…is…the…name…of…a…car!’. The father replies, ‘so why did you allow my firstborn to be named ‘Mercedes?’

  4. Frank DS: Good one!
    MC: Actually, “Mercedes” means “reward” in Latin. “Mercy” would be “misericordia,” which I wouldn’t advise most parents to name there children. 馃槈

  5. Speaking of Hispanic names, I wonder why naming your child ‘Jesus’ (He-sus) is so common and so inoffensive in Latin culture, but naming your child ‘Jesus’ (Jee-sus) sounds blasphemous in Western society.
    I have friends named Jesus (Hesus), and the spelling is with a J. I am sure the priest would not have baptised them if the parents said the pronunciation is with a ‘J’.

  6. Speaking of naming kids “God,” I’m reminded that Grace Slick did just that with hers–but with a lower-case “g” because she didn’t want to be pretentious….

  7. LOL… “Moon unit.”
    By coincidence (or IS it?), my Mormon girlfriend happens to have a Latin name, with as great a patron as I could ask for: Regina!

  8. Yes, misericordia (Latin and Spanish) is one word for mercy but merced also has that meaning. It is a more nuanced meaning I suppose.
    mer路ced
    f.
    1. (beneficio) – gift, favor
    2. (RELIGION) – mercy
    3. archaic (t铆tulo) – grace, worship
    a la merced de – at the mercy of
    merced a – thanks to
    tenga la merced de – please be so kind as
    INFLECTED FORMS: mercedes – f.
    mi路se路ri路cor路dia
    f. – mercy, compassion
    In my parents culture, it is customary to give baptismal titles as well as names. For example, mine is “de los angeles” and my mother’s is “de las mercedes”. These don’t appear on our baptismal record but serve more of a devotional purpose. Much like the titles religious take, I guess.

  9. When I was a medical student, I delivered twin girls, whose mother named them Mercedes and Lexus.
    Insert joke here:_______________
    Clay

  10. My mother-in-law’s baptismal horror story had to do with her next-to-youngest daughter (born 1957). She wanted to call her Jean Marie but the priest insisted on baptizing her Mary Patricia. Why he thought Jean Marie insufficiently Christian I have no idea.
    BTW, in the case of Mercedes, the car was named after a girl – the young daughter of the manufacturer’s business partner, or someone like that.

  11. I get really irritated with all the new “Mac” names they give girls now.
    One of my patients told me she named her daughter “McKenzie” but she spells it with a “Big ‘M’ little ‘c'”
    I said, “You know you named your daughter ‘Son of Kenzie’ don’t you?”
    Which I later found means “Son of Kenneth.”

Comments are closed.