A reader writes:
I’m a fairly recent convert, and I have a question about baptismal and confirmation names. From what I understand, an infant is given a name at baptism, usually a saint’s name.
Frequently this is the case. Current Church law only requires that the name not be "foreign to Christian sensibility" (e.g., if you wanted to name your kid "Lucifer" or something). See canon 855 on that.
This name is also the child’s legal name (usually the first name).
Usually, but there’s no law requiring that.
Let’s say that a boy is named Peter Terry Brooks after St. Peter. Is St. Peter considered the boy’s patron saint at this point?
It is customary to regard saints who share one’s name as one’s patrons. However, one can turn to any saint one wants and ask for his intercession.
At confirmation some years later, that boy can choose another name for a patron saint, say St. Luke.
He can do this, but canon law does not require him to take a new name at confirmation.
Now, is this really a new name he takes, or does he only have St. Luke as a patron saint?
If you take a new name, you take a new name. It may not be recorded anywhere (e.g., in diocesan records, in your county courthouse’s records, by the Social Security Administration), but it’s a new name. It also would be customary to regard St. Luke as a patron if one takes the name "Luke" at confirmation.
Could that boy call himself Peter Luke Terry Brooks or Luke Peter Terry Brooks?
He could call himself either, or he could simply say "My confirmation name is Luke" without trying to fit it into any particular order with his other names.
(Would this make any change in their legal name, or would a legal change need to be done through the government?)
Confirmation names have no bearing on one’s legal name under civil law. One would thus not need to contact the government.
Would the child now have two patron saints?
Yes. At least that is how it would customarily be regarded.
This all came to mind after reading your "Jimmy vs. James" post a while back, and thinking about my own confirmation.
No prob! Glad to be of help!
Incidentally, all the above also goes for taking religious names (e.g., if a person named Albert joins a religious order and takes the religious name John then in religious life he’ll be called "John" and be regarded as having St. John as a patron, even though his drivers license and social security card will still say "Albert." This kind of situation can–and has–caused some priests problems since 9/11 with all the new security measures).
Followup: I was named after the reigning pontiff at the time I was born, John XXIII. Should I regard him as my patron (he’s been venerated, hasn’t he?) or would the original John, the beloved apostle, hold that dubious honor?
I was baptized in a Baptist church when I was 21 years old, then converted to Catholicism about a year later. I chose St. Therese of Lisieux as my confirmation saint, and so she is my patron saint.
However, I have grown in the past few years in devotion to St. Joseph, by the grace of God, and so I consider him my patron saint as well.
And we all have our Blessed Mother as our patroness par excellence, so with God, there is room for more than one “patron” saint!
The Feast Day or Memorial of the day that our child is baptized is recognized in our home as that child’s patron saint.
We also have a fervent devotion to our Guardian Angels and the protection of St. Michael.
Think: when it comes to patrons, the more the merrier! We need all the help we can get!
In our prayers, btw, we have entrusted the needs of our Mormon brothers and sisters to the intercession of St. Polycarp, because LDS specifically teaches that the Church went apostate after the death of St. John the Apostle.
Little do they know how much St. Polycarp, St. John’s student, loves them and prays for them!
Whimsy