First Names of Popes and Bishops
Date: August 11, 2024
Author: Fr. Edward McNamara, LC
Question: In the Prayers of the Faithful and the Eucharistic Prayer, why does the Church address the local ordinary by his first name? -- T.N., Fort Worth, Texas
Answer: This is a thought-provoking question. The naming of the Pope and the bishop by their first names occurs in all Eucharistic Prayers, but we will give as an example the Roman Canon as this would be the earliest version in the Roman rite:
“(…) accept
and bless † these gifts, these offerings,
these holy and unblemished sacrifices,
which we offer you firstly
for your holy catholic Church.
Be pleased to grant her peace,
to guard, unite and govern her
throughout the whole world,
together with your servant N. our Pope
and N. our Bishop,
and all those who, holding to the truth,
hand on the catholic and apostolic faith.”
These general intercessory prayers were incorporated into the Eucharistic Prayer around the end of the fourth century. Before this time, the intercessions were proclaimed before the offertory. They were somewhat longer and were proclaimed in a manner like the great intercessions still recited on Good Friday.
This migration of the intercessions within the body of the Eucharistic Prayer occurred in almost all Western and Eastern liturgies, albeit in different fashions. The only exceptions were the now-extinct Gallic liturgy of Southern France and the Hispanic or Mozarabic liturgy which survives today in the Archdiocese of Toledo in Spain.
According to the manuscript evidence, we first find only the mention of the Pope around the year 500. The mention of the local bishop, however, was gradually added, especially outside of Italy. One of the earliest manuscripts mentioning the bishop, the Bobbio Missal, dates from around the year 700 and obviously reflects an already consolidated practice.
But why only mention the first name? I think that we do not need to seek deep theological reasons but rather see the naming of Pope and bishop in its historical context.
In the case of Pope this was probably caused by the custom of adopting regnal names rather than keeping one’s original given name. This custom of adopting a regnal name seems to originate with John II who changed his name in the year 533. His given name was that of the pagan god Mercury, which he probably thought inappropriate.
In the case of bishop’s however, I think the reason why they were only known by their first names is because formal hereditary surnames did not yet exist in Europe. People were generally known by their given name and some other element to distinguish them from others of the same name.
These could be the name of a clan or of a relative such as a father or grandfather (Johnson, McDonald or O’Brian), a trade (Smith, Baker, Priest) or some other physical characteristic (Hill, Short, Long).
The nobility also gradually adopted surnames either associated with a distinguished ancestor (Fitzgerald) or more commonly with a prefix such as “De” or “Von” related to the seat or origin of their wealth or power (Von Habsburg, de Nevilles, De Bourbon).
Many of these gradually evolved into hereditary surnames, but it was only after the 11th century that governments began to legislate to render surnames obligatory. This was done above all for the purpose of census and taxation.
Even though I have mentioned that we need not look beyond the historical facts to justify the practice of referring to the bishop just by his name, it would also seem to be appropriate.
In the end, God knows each and every one of us by name in a very personal way as a friend. Mentioning the bishop only by his name is a way of interceding to God for him according to the mission he has received from God through the Church and without any additions and titles.
It reminds us, and it reminds the bishop, of his mission of service. As St. Augustine so well expressed in a sermon, “On the Anniversary of His Ordination” (Sermon 340):
“What, though, is to be dreaded in this office, if not that I may take more pleasure, which is so dangerous, in the honor shown me, than in what bear fruit in your salvation? Let me therefore have the assistance of your prayers, that the one who did not disdain to bear with me may also deign to bear my burden with me. When you pray like that, you are also praying for yourselves. This burden of mine, you see, about which I am now speaking, what else is it, after all, but you? Pray for strength for me, just as I pray that you may not be too heavy.
“Where I’m terrified by what I am for you, I am given comfort by what I am with you. For you I am a bishop, with you, after all, I am a Christian. The first is the name of an office undertaken, the second a name of grace; that one means danger, this one salvation. Finally, as if in the open sea, I am being tossed about by the stormy activity involved in that one; but as I recall by whose blood I have been redeemed, I enter a safe harbor in the tranquil recollection of this one; and thus while toiling away at my own proper office, I take my rest in the marvelous benefit conferred on all of us in common ….
“So let us pray together, dearly beloved, that my tenure as bishop may be of profit both to me and to you. It will profit me, if I tell you what has to be done; and you, if you do what you hear. You see, if we all pray tirelessly, I for you and you for me, with the perfect love of charity, we shall all happily attain, with the Lord’s help, to eternal bliss. May he be graciously pleased to grant us this, who lives and reigns forever and ever. Amen.”
* * *
Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word "Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.