So, why is a catechumen encouraged to take on a “new” name when they are chrismated? What’s in a name?
Taking on a new name is not necessary, but it is highly encouraged. The background to a name change goes all the way back to the beginnings of God’s special interactions with Abraham and continued all the way through the New Testament. There is a long list of people who had their name changed by God. Abram became Abraham. Sarai became Sarah. Jacob became Israel, etc. The name change showed that God has authority over a person’s very identity. When God says you have been changed; you have truly been changed. One can see the parallel to salvation. God did not change every one’s name, but when He did, He did it to either show authority or to show a very special mission for that person.
It is important to note that names were also changed in the New Testament. Simon becomes Peter. Saul becomes Paul. In fact, the change of name that our Lord Jesus gave to Peter was tantamount to claiming the He is God, just as much as the “I Am” statements of Jesus. For our Lord Jesus to change Peter’s name while Jesus was here on earth was essentially a public proclamation that He has the authority of God. Notice that in the Book of Revelation our Lord Jesus says, “To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.” So that all of us who overcome will, at the end be “changed in the twinkling of an eye” and will receive a new name at that time. No, I have no idea what this Scripture actually means, but I want us to catch the concept of a name change being involved in whatever happens to us at the end, when we shall be saved.
Let me stress again that taking on a new name is not required. However, it is two things. It is another way of declaring that I have been changed by God, and that He has full rights over me down to the very core of my identity of who I am. In fact, it is a declaration that He has changed, will continue to change, and will change my very identity until I not only have the image of God, but also the likeness of God. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.”
Secondly, in tradition, a name change has become a way to identify with a particular saint. We are encouraged to take on the name of a saint whom we wish to emulate, and whom we wish to be our heavenly sponsor even as we have earthly sponsor. Thus, to take on a saint’s name is to commit ourselves to get to know that saint and his/her life, to see how his/her example may influence our life, and to ask that saint for his/her intercessory prayers before the throne of God. In this sense, it is also statement of belief that, as Jesus said when He spoke about God being the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, “But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken.” We can take on the name of a saint in the belief that God is not the God of the dead. These saints are alive and in communication with God.
How is the name-taking done in practice? My wife has “two” middle names (Roman Catholic), one taken at confirmation. Is that the common Orthodox practice, or do some change their entire name?
And, for another time, how is sainthood achieved in the Orthodox tradition?
In practice, your parents choose your saint’s name as a child. There is no confirmation after baptism in Orthodoxy, except in the case of those who come into Orthodoxy, and, as I mentioned, they may then choose a new name. However, there are several classes of people who may also receive a new name. Beginning with subdeacons, one may choose (or be given) a new name when one is becoming a: subdeacon, deacon, priest, bishop, monk, nun. That practice is also found in the Roman Catholic Church, although it is rarely exercised outside the Pope, monastics, and some of the Byzantine Rite Roman Catholics.
Would it be otherwise possible to choose a new name? Yes, of course. It is simply not often exercised.
I will leave the sainthood question for another time.
I’m glad this name change wasn’t enforced on me. It helps that my name is already in place to honor a Biblical example, but truthfully name changing is a mess in modern American culture.
I can see when one becomes a monastic as they die to the world in the most extreme sense, but anyone who still lives in the world needs to keep their name. A priest and possibly a deacon might have similar call to change their name at tonsure.
If I were outside the Church and some friend said they were going to change their name when they joined a religion, I would, on that basis alone press them to not join. It’s creepy, possibly dangerous and needlessly offensive to family, friends and co-workers.
If I’m told to wear my baptismal cross under my shirt, I see no reason to make the even more obnoxious demonstration of changing my name when I convert.
Hey David, you have given some of the reasons why the name change is encouraged but not required. A name change does not fit every person in every culture. As you point out, sometimes it is actually better in a given setting to keep one’s birth name. In some other cases, such as yours, there is already a good birth name, with no need to change it.
It is not a rule.
I apologize for my strange tone. I’m impulsive at times and seem to have a bit of bluster lately. I think I’ve just got nerves before my first Great Lent.
Thank you for your patience with me, a sinner.
David,
More often than not, at least in my parish, upon conversion a person is given a new name which is often called a “baptismal name.” When we administer any of the sacraments to that person, we use that name rather than their given name. But the person normally will continue to go by their given name at other times. For example, my wife and oldest three daughters are named (respectively) Jennifer, Audrey, Courtney, and Beth. Their baptismal names are Sophia, Faith, Hope and Love. When I (the assistant priest in my parish) or our main priest give them communion, hear a confession, etc, we call them Sophia, Faith, Hope, and Love. But I still call them by their regular names in all other situations.
Fr. Ernesto, I hope you don’t mind me throwing in my two cents. BTW, I just discovered your blog (thanks to Joseph at Byzantine, Texas), and I love it. I am going to put it on the sidebar of my blog, which I encourage you to visit at http://saintjameskids.blogspot.com.
Fr. James,
The same is true in my parish. I have a couple of people who have a baptismal name that is actually used only with the Church and does not exist legally. That solves some problems and is a good solution. Keep throwing your two cents in.
That sounds like treating someone as two different persons, the kingdom person and the worldly person. That certainly solves the problem, but might create a different one.
It doesn’t matter. Wiser folks than me have worked this out. I only interjected my opinion (as I said) out of impulsiveness. Again, forgive me.
David, I did not think that your comment was impulsive.
The two names, one for Church and one for the world could create two persons. But, that is where good teaching during the catechumenate is supposed to take care of any such problem.