When did the pope of Rome?

[Big_Feet]

When did the pope of Rome begin to take on another name at the time of his elevation to that office?

 

[ConstantineTG]

When did the pope of Rome begin to take on another name at the time of his elevation to that office?

I believe when a Bishop named Mercurius was elected Pope. They considered it not right that one with the name of a pagan god be the Vicar of Christ. He became Pope John II.

Also the tradition is maintained more in the East when those ordained take on new names. This is following the tradition of Simon who became Kepha or Peter, and Saul who became Paul, when they were called. Though there’s nothing wrong too with keeping your name, as Sts. John and Andrew and a list of others didn’t take any new name.

 

[adrift]

I believe when a Bishop named Mercurius was elected Pope. They considered it not right that one with the name of a pagan god be the Vicar of Christ. He became Pope John II.

Also the tradition is maintained more in the East when those ordained take on new names. This is following the tradition of Simon who became Kepha or Peter, and Saul who became Paul, when they were called. Though there’s nothing wrong too with keeping your name, as Sts. John and Andrew and a list of others didn’t take any new name.

Paul had two names one was his Jewish name and one was his Roman name.
St. Paul

As he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin he was given at the time of his circumcision the name of Saul, which must have been common in that tribe in memory of the first king of the Jews (Phil., iii, 5). As a Roman citizen he also bore the Latin name of Paul. It was quite usual for the Jews of that time to have two names, one Hebrew, the other Latin or Greek, between which there was often a certain assonance and which were joined together exactly in the manner made use of by St. Luke (Acts, xiii, 9: Greek: Saulos o kai Paulos). See on this point Deissmann, “Bible Studies” (Edinburgh, 1903), 313-17. It was natural that in inaugurating his apostolate among the Gentiles Paul should have adopted his Roman name, especially as the name Saul had a ludicrous meaning in Greek.

 

[Lancer]

New Advent
Conclave

When a candidate has obtained the required two-thirds vote in a scrutiny or ballot (the choice, since Adrian VI, 1522, falling on one present and invariably on an Italian cardinal), the cardinal dean proceeds to ask him whether he will accept the election and by what name he wishes to be known.** Since the time of John XII (955-64; Sägmüller says Sergius IV, 1009-1012) each pope takes a new name in imitation of St. Peter’s change of name **(see Knöpfler, “Die Namensänderung der Päpste” in “Compte rendu du congrés internat. cath. à Fribourg”, 1897, sec. v, 158 sqq.). The doors have previously been opened by the secretary of the conclave; the masters of ceremonies are present, and formal cognizance is taken of the pope’s answers. Immediately the masters of ceremonies lower the canopies of all the cardinals’ chairs save that of the pope-elect, and he is conducted to a neighbouring room where he is clothed in the papal garments (immantatio). The cardinals then advance and pay him the first “obedience”, or homage (adoratio). The pope then either confirms or appoints the cardinal camerlengo, who puts upon his finger the Fisherman’s Ring. Then follows the proclamation to the people made by the senior cardinal-deacon, formerly from the central balcony of St. Peter’s overlooking the great Piazza, but since 1870 in St. Peter’s itself. The conclave then usually terminates, the masons remove the temporary walls, and the cardinals retire to their various lodgings in the city, awaiting a reassembling for the second and third adoratio and for the solemn enthroning. If the pope happens not to be a bishop, he must be consecrated at once and, according to immemorial tradition, by the Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia. If already a bishop, there takes place only the solemn benedictio or blessing. However, he enjoys full jurisdiction from the moment of his election. On the following Sunday or Holy Day takes place, at the hands of the senior cardinal-deacon, the papal “coronation” from which day the new pope dates the years of his pontificate. The last act is the formal taking possession (possessio) of the Lateran Church, omitted since 1870. For the so-called Veto, occasionally exercised in the past by the Catholic Powers (Spain, Austria, France), see RIGHT OF EXCLUSION.

newadvent.org/cathen/04192a.htm

Pax Christi

 

[Philotheatoo]

And, the right answer is…?

 

[Joe_5859]

Mercurius/Pope John II (533-535 AD) was the first instance of a pope taking on a new name (since his given name being that of a Roman god seemed somehow inappropriate for the Vicar of Christ ). But it was with John XII in 965 AD that it became matter-of-course for the Pope to take a different name.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Paul had two names one was his Jewish name and one was his Roman name.
St. Paul

Thanks. Although that is the reason given by Eastern Rite priests and bishops. Some even take on a new name as soon as they are ordained a deacon. I know in the Latin Rite it is uncommon and usually its only the Pope who takes on a new name.

 

[TimothyH]

I believe when a Bishop named Mercurius was elected Pope. They considered it not right that one with the name of a pagan god be the Vicar of Christ. He became Pope John II.

Also the tradition is maintained more in the East when those ordained take on new names. This is following the tradition of Simon who became Kepha or Peter, and Saul who became Paul, when they were called. Though there’s nothing wrong too with keeping your name, as Sts. John and Andrew and a list of others didn’t take any new name.

The tradition of taking a new name goes back to Genesis. Names are very important in the Bible and throughout, God names and renames people as an indication of their identity and who they serve. God renames Abram and Sari to Abraham and Sara for example.

So the LORD God formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the air, and he brought them to the man to see what he would call them; whatever the man called each living creature was then its name. The man gave names to all the tame animals, all the birds of the air, and all the wild animals; but none proved to be a helper suited to the man. (Genesis 2:19-20)

When God gives man a name, it shows that the man’s identity comes from God, from his relationship with God. Who a man is, his identity, is based on his relationship with God. Man serves the one who names him. In Genesis 2 however, God allows man to name the animals. This shows that the animal’s idenity and purpose is based on their relationship to man. The animals were given by God to man as a gift, they are to serve man, and so man gets to name them.

They said to one another, “Come, let us mold bricks and harden them with fire.” They used bricks for stone, and bitumen for mortar. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the sky, and so make a name for ourselves; otherwise we shall be scattered all over the earth.” (Genesis 11:3-4)

The people of Babel wanted to build a tower with its top in heaven. They thought they could get to heaven through their own ingenuity and intellect and in so doing, wanted to make a name for themselves. They named themselves - their identity was based on their own achievements, not on God. They make a name for themselves - and the served themselves.

Jesus renamed the Apostles, and Jesus is God. He is the God of both the Old Testament and the New Tesamant. One God. The God who is, who was, and who is to come at the end of the ages. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. Amen. Jesus, who renamed the Apostles, is the same God who renamed Abraham, allowed the first man to name the beasts, and scrambled the languages because the people of Babel wanted to make their own name.

The Jews would not name a male child until it was circumcized on the 8th day of it’s life. We baptize our children with a name and take on new names at confirmation. Same deal.

Taking a name from God might be the oldest tradtion there is.

-Tim-

 

[Genesis315]

After it became a matter of course, there has been one exception: Marcellus II in 1555. If I’m not mistaken, he was also St. Robert Bellarmine’s uncle.