P
- Status
L
laszlo
Guest
Our name has a lifetime effect on us: are we from the world, for the world, by the world, or we are from Christ, for Christ and by Christ who we are.
On the good old time the first name was called Christian name.
On the good old time the first name was called Christian name.
B
Belloc_Fan
Guest
I’m highly suspicious of the *Telegraph’s *coverage here. The Catholic sources covering the speech said he praised the practice of giving children Christian names in Baptism, not that he “railed” against non-Christian names. And the quotes that your link provides don’t support the idea that he was railing at all.
As for why he cares, Catholics believe that in Baptism, you’re “born again” (see John 3), a spiritual birth instead of a physical birth. The symbol for this has traditionally been that in Baptism, children are given a Christian name, to show that they were Christians (which is why first names are sometimes still called that). In the same way, when he became pope, Joseph Ratzinger took on the new name Pope Benedict. The change of name signals the invisible change in our relationship with God.
If I’m not mistaken, the practice arose because many of the Roman converts to Christianity were named after Pagan gods. So, for example, the first pope to change his name was named Mercurius, after Mercury. Having a pope named after a pagan god struck him as inappropriate, so upon becoming pope, he changed his name to John (this is Pope John II, btw).
This is a wholly unneeded potshot. If you knew what you were talking about here, you’d hesitate before raising such insinuations. I challenge you to find anyone, within or without the bounds of the Church who did as much as Benedict to combat the abuse of children by priests. The fact that he doesn’t sound the trumpet before doing good works is no reason to cast such vile aspersions upon him.
T
tm30
Guest
I think the bigger question is, why do you care?
E
estesbob
Guest
Since he didnt rail against un-Chrisitan names the question is moot.
F
FightingFat
Guest
S
Skeptic92
Guest
P
Pug
Guest
He gave the talk shortly after baptizing 21 children, and on the feast of the baptism of our Lord. Usually, priests give talks that are appropriate to the occasion or day. Christians give names at baptism and also at confirmation, but remember, we are all called “Christian” after being baptized. Utilizing the chief (only?) quote from the Telegraph article, they appear to mean this speech, quoted below:It is not by chance, in fact, that every baptized person acquires the character of son from the name Christian, indisputable sign that the Holy Spirit brings man to be born “again” from the womb of the Church. Blessed Anotonio Rosmini says that “the baptized person undergoes a secret but most powerful operation by which he is raised up to the supernatural order, he is placed in communication with God” (“Del principio supremo della metodica,” Torino, 1857, n. 331). All of this was again fulfilled this morning during the Eucharistic celebration in the Sistine Chapel, where I conferred the sacrament of baptism on 21 newborns.
If he railed, then I suggest the Telegraph ought to quote the railing. It seems a unexceptional speech.
J
JoeMike
Guest
In a world where you’re only allowed to care about one thing at a time, your argument would be valid.
And, for all we know, the Pope cares even more about kids from other religious groups, who are statistically more likely than Catholic kids to experience abuse.
F
FightingFat
Guest
This I find offensive, ill informed and ill advised. I understand the way the utterly disgusting events of abuse which took place within the purported safe environment of Mother Church was portrayed by the mass media. Indeed, anyone who followed the story must have the impression that the Catholic Church is exclusively a system of injustice and sexual crimes. It was immediately laid at the feet of Catholic teaching on sexuality and celibacy, the accusation levelled that these must be directly connected to abuse. The fact that there were similar incidents in non-Catholic institutions faded into the back ground. The German criminologist Christian Pfeiffer reported approximately 0.1% of those who committed abuse come from the personnel of the Catholic Church: 99.9% came from other areas. In the US, a government report for 2008 lists the proportions of priests who were involved in cases of pedophilia at 0.03%. The Protestant Christian Science Monitor published a study according to which the Protestant denominations in America are affected by a much higher rate of pedophilia.
Each and every Catholic is wounded by these abuses. Recently in Malta the Pope met with several victims of abuse. One of them, Joseph Magro, said afterward “The Pope wept along with me, although he is in no way guilty for what happened to me”. For me, that speaks volumes, for we believe that the Church is a source for good, that she communicates the light of Christ to the world, that she helps people in life. Yet she is an institution made up of human beings. Sinful human beings, rooted in man’s sinful situation. We all weep when people use the institution we believe to bring so much good into the world into such bitter ill-repute.
The Pope, like all faithful Catholics, cares deeply for everyone, especially the vulnerable:
youtube.com/watch?v=HI5xzfuaW8g&feature=player_embedded
J
Joe_5859
Guest
As others have said, the point is moot because the Pope did no such thing. Look at the VIS excerpts from the homily, or read through the Pope’s homily for January 9, 2011, on the Vatican website (once the English translation is posted, probably within a week). I can’t find anything that resembles “railing” against un-Christian names.
Though, if he did say anything, it’s probably no more than has already been said in the Catechism: CCC 2156-2159.
In any case, even if the headline was accurate, the atheist’s argument is a total red herring. It’s a weak appeal to emotionalism whenever someone argues that thing X is insignificant simply because thing Y is more important. People do have the capability of caring about more than one thing at a time, and even working on more than one thing at a time.
Though, if he did say anything, it’s probably no more than has already been said in the Catechism: CCC 2156-2159.
In any case, even if the headline was accurate, the atheist’s argument is a total red herring. It’s a weak appeal to emotionalism whenever someone argues that thing X is insignificant simply because thing Y is more important. People do have the capability of caring about more than one thing at a time, and even working on more than one thing at a time.
T
Tietjen
Guest
The Holy Father can and deals with multiple problems. He’s a multi-tasker.
Obviously.
Why should you care about what he cares about?
See my answer to your first question.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Personally, I think the Pope makes a good point. Why saddle your child with a weird-sounding name for his entire life? Look what they do to politicians with those kinds of names. That said, the weirdness of some names seems to be an American thing. But that may be because feast day celebrations are not as popular as they are elsewhere. I used to get a card on my saint’s day when I lived in London. Haven’t seen Hallmark make this too popular in the U.S.
F
FightingFat
Guest
It’s definitely getting more prevelant over here too. My seven year old’s classmates have names like Jolanda, Jordana, Gabanna, Cliona
A
Abyssinia
Guest
What is with the dig at the Catholic Church? Yes the Church has made mistakes many years ago, but are good Priests now who have done nothing wrong going to be held responsible for the Crimes of Bishops ad Priests in the past, a small minority who have committed crimes and covered them up?
Find me a single Catholic source regarding the Pope calling for Christian names? I looked at the Pope’s speech about baptism and it says nothing about names:
zenit.org/article-31398?l=english
B
barb_finnegan
Guest
I agree, especially with your second sentence, ‘Why saddle your child with a weird-sounding name for his entire life?’ BINGO!
I roll my eyes every time I see the names that parents give their children. Don’t they ever realize that kids are not going to be kids forever? Show some common sense, for God’s sake! Don’t parents have any brains?
The stupid names given to kids these days may sound cute when they’re born, but they’re going to teased and bullied about them when they get into school!
I sure hate to see the lists of residents in a nursing home of the future with all these ‘cutesy-funsy’ names! It’s going to look pretty ridiculous!
As far the OP, it was uncalled for what he said about the Holy Father. In fact, I was just SpiritDaily.com, and I found a link from the Montreal Gazette using the same word, ‘rail’. The MSM, in my opinion, is clueless…sheesh…
A
Anna_jane
Guest
It doesn’t seem as though he exactly “railed”: that’s the problem with any major public figure, anything they say has to become a newstory. And if he didn’t say anything headline-worthy, make something up!
Though I think it might be a good idea for local pastors to mention the names issue. It can be selfishness to give a child a weird name so that everyone will be impressed with how creative it’s parents were.
Though I think it might be a good idea for local pastors to mention the names issue. It can be selfishness to give a child a weird name so that everyone will be impressed with how creative it’s parents were.
F
FightingFat
Guest
I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to look at the new book Light of The World that everyone’s been talking about, but in that, the Pope mentions a conversation he had with the Archbishop of Dublin in which the Archbishop said that ecclesial penal law functioned until the late 1950’s. After the mid-sixties this ceased to be the case, the prevailing attitude became that the Church must not be a Church of laws but, rather, a Church of love; she must not punish. Thus the awareness that punishment can be an act of love ceased to exist. This led to an odd darkening of the mind, the Pope says, even in very good people…A very interesting reflection on the issue IMO!
E
estesbob
Guest
I prefer:
Mary
Ann
Joseph
John
Patricia
Anthony
Hillary
Isaac
Samuel
Adam
Eve
Elizabeth
Peter
James
Matthew
Luke
Thomas
etc
- Status