A case of “When in Rome,do as the Roman’s do.”? It’s ok by me.

While not commonly used here, I don’t see a huge conflict in using the Pope’s last name. You are still referring to his station by using “Pope.” I guess my feeling may come from being raised by the daughter of second generation European Catholics. I think regionality does play into this usage majorly. Where I was born in the Northeastern US, we were always to call adults Mr. or Mrs Last name. Here in the southeast, my neighbor’s children call me Ms. Kristen. (And here Mrs is always shortened to Ms or Miss regardless of marriage). I guess like a lot of things, “When in Rome…”

I think I first came across this usage in Kevin Orlin Johnson’s book about the Rosary, when he referred to “Pope Paul VI Montini” or “Pius XII Pacelli”.

Good to know that it’s far from being disrespectful, but it still seems so strange.  “Pope Regnalname” seems to focus on the pope as the holder of an office, as successor of Peter.  Pope Lastname seems to put the focus on the individual man, but at the same time seems to blur the distinction between the preferences of the individual man and the teachings of the successor of Peter.

Doesn’t bother me too much, but I do prefer the regnal names. Actually I really like the E. Orthodox deal of having all Bishops take regnal names (but this is because they all take new names when they become monks and since most Bishops in the east are first monks it is by default).

I always thought that when a man becomes pope, he changes his name.  I wonder how many people would choke on calling a celebrity by their old name, for example, calling boxer Mohammed Ali by the name of Cassius Clay when talking about about something he did yesterday (as opposed to when that was his name).

The only time I would debate what form of the name to use is if I were talking about something that happened long ago.  Would it be right to say “when he was a kid, Pope Benedict did….” or would it be more right to say “when he was a kid Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) did…”.

While it is interesting to hear about European customs in referring to the Pope, I don’t see any reason to change our own practices. I find regional differences charming. Personally, I think that not using a pontiff’s surname emphasizes his office and seems a fitting response to his choosing a new name when elected.

I was taught that it is disrespectful to call priests Fr. [LastName] for the same reasons Jimmy lists for not referring to the pope that way. I was taught to call them Fr. [ChristianName] out of respect for their vocation and office because they’ve left behind their secular ties (last name) and dedicated themselves to God’s service (Christian name).

Since I moved to the South, calling a priest Fr. [ChristianName] is seen as offensive and familiar while Fr. [LastName] is formal and showing respect. As Keri notes, it stands out to call someone by the last name here because it is so rarely done. I’ve actually been *chastised* for calling priests Fr. [ChristianName]! I imagine I would be similarly chastised by the same group for saying Pope Ratzinger, though. Interesting double standard.

I don’t see a case here for changing the normal American practice of using the regnal name.  (As some commenters above have noted, “When in Rome…”  Well, when in America…)

I *do* see a case here for not taking offense at our European brothers and sisters when they use the Pope’s last name.  In their context, it seems that it’s perfectly respectful, even if it sounds odd to us.

Peace,
—Peter

It’s also an easier way that the oft-heard phrase “Former Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.” I think that is overused. If you plan on saying that a lot, maybe saying “Pope Ratzinger” would be better.

If you look at the roster of popes throughout history, there are periods where the same regnal name is used with high frequency, differing only in the number.  I can imagine using the birth name to avoid confusion, and then the practice just sticking—for centuries.  How Catholic!

Interestingly—and hopefully not totally off the subject—when the Pope dies, or is believed to have died, the ritual calls for him to be lighly tapped, 3 times on the forehead (with a tiny gold or silver hammer), during which he is addressed by his Baptismal name. Thus when Pope John Paul I died, it is recorded that this was carried out with the words “Albino, Albino, Albino; are you dead?” Being no answer came forth, the ring was removed, the seal dashed, and the notice given. Likely the first time since becoming Pope that anyone called him “Albino.”

Thanks for posting this. Born and raised in Italy, even though I already spent a good chunk of time in the U.S. I keep running into cultural differences. I can assure all American readers that the Papa [last name] usage in Italy is very common and in no way demeaning. I recall seeing most recent popes being named this way, and even though I had no recollection of reading “Papa Pecci” to refer to Leo XIII, a quick Google search shows many matches, including the Osservatore Romano. Amusingly, I also bumped into a Google Books reference to “The American Catholic quarterly review, Volume 30 edited by James Andrew Corcoran, Patrick John Ryan, Edmond Francis Prendergast”, where this is found: “Speaking of this last named personage the author permits himself to employ the following language, p. xxvi.: ‘I precedenti di Papa Pecci e [...]’ [...]. Possibly the epithet “Papa Pecci” is indicative.”

Here in Sweden, journalist usually prefer this style: “Benedict XVI, whose real name is Joseph Ratzinger..” :D

Theophilus:
regarding diocesan priests, I prefer Father Surname.  By “Father Christian Name” I assume you mean “Father first birth name”.  That, to me, is too informal.  I think there is a place for calling him by his first name, if he has taken a religious name and that name is his new, de facto “first name”, i.e. little Billy grows up, professes, takes name of Francis, and is then called Father Francis by his parishioners.

Can anyone confirm this?

Hit submit too fast!
But I would not call him “Father Bill”.

I have always found it funny when Americans think that the customs of other countries are disrespectful. That, to me, is just another example of how arrogant we have become. We constantly think that the way we do things is better and/or that other countries/cultures should do what we do.

I have always found it curious when people use the term “Holy Father” when making a reference about the pope as in, “Our present Holy Father was born in…” Instead, I was always given to understand that “Holy Father” is a way of addressing the pope when speaking to him in the same way that you address a priest as “Father” but do not make references about him in that way. No one says, “Fr. Smith is the Father at my parish”. Rather, you say, “Father Smith is the priest at my parish”. Nevertheless, people refer to the pope as Holy Father instead of simply saying “the pope” or, as is customary in official documents, “the Roman Pontiff” or “the Supreme Pontiff”. Just as it would be awkward and inappropriate to greet the pope by saying, “Good morning, pope!” (or similarly to greet your priest by saying, “Good morning, priest!”) it always sounds awkward to me when people refer to the pope by saying, “The Holy Father said this or the Holy Father did that.”

By the way, the custom of addressing the pope by his Baptismal name when he is dead is still continued BUT the bit about hitting him on the head with a hammer was abandoned at the beginning of the 20th century. It is not done anymore. People love to perpetuate that little myth because it conjures up such an interesting theatrical image.

As for what is and isn’t a “real” name: I knew a monk whose baptismal name was Daniel and whose monastic name was Warren. Whenever people asked him is Warren was his “real name” he would reply by saying, “Yes, Warren is my real monastic name, but my baptismal name is something else.” Good for him!

I’m curious if any Popes prior to John XXIII were called by their pre-papal name?  I think I’ll search the Vatican website for any references to Pope Pacelli (Pius XI).  I have a feeling I will find no references utilizing this terminology prior to John XXIII.

In Italian it’s fine, but not in English.
In italiano va bene, ma in inglese non va.

I prefer to call him Satan in human form.

“Inside the Vatican” refers to Popes Pacelli, Roncalli, Montini, Luciani, Wojtyla, Ratzinger, quite a lot. It seems to be a nasty Italian habit. It has referred to “Pope Mastai-Ferretti” at least once; so this way of referring to Popes is not confined to those recently dead. 
*
What is very ugly IMHO is talk of “Saint Padre Pio”.

If the Vatican uses that designation, so be it.

I think of Pope John Paul II as a great personal friend, although I did not know him at all until the day he died and many of my friends and co-workers were praising him up to high heaven as a great and loving man, even those who are not Christians at all.  I have a great personal affection and devotion to him as he really demonstrated in my life the words of Jesus that “unless a grain of wheat fall into the ground and dies, it does not produce fruit.  If it falls into the ground and dies, it produces much fruit.”  I wish I had known him while he was alive in this world, but I did not.  I wish I could have met him face to face before he was even ordained and said “Hello, Mr. Wojtyla! How are you?”  or “Hi Karol”  or “Hi Lolek” as he was nicknamed.  There might be some situations and people with whom I might refer to Pope Benedict or Pope John Paul II as Pope Ratzinger or Pope Wojtyla, after reading this article.  Sometimes when I ask for Blessed John Paul II’s intercession, I say “Fr. Karol, will you please pray for this.”  I don’t know if this is appropriate, but I just have a great love for this Pope as a man and as a personal friend, although I never met him in the flesh in person.  I just love him and miss him, and hope that someday in Heaven I can talk to him as a close intimate friend in the faith, and be on a first name basis with him even.  What he could not complete in person of the mission that God gave him in this life, I take up as my own life’s work, because he probably brought me to Christ and His Church more than any other single individual who ever lived, besides Jesus Himself.  He brought me to Mary, and Mary brought me closer to Jesus.  Whenever I had trouble praying the Rosary, I’d come across John Paul II’s quote that the Rosary is his favorite prayer and I’d plod through it, no matter how difficult it was to get through a complete Rosary.

In another interesting aside…
While praying the stations of the cross in the small cemetary used for the nuns who worked with and followed St. Elizabeth Ann Seaton, in Emmitsburg Md., I was suprised to see all of the sisters from the 18 and 1900’s buried under their full baptismal name, rather than their professed name.

Yes, I can claim to have invented the form “Paul IV Carafa”, “Julius II della Rovere”, etc.  Originally I put it into my manuscripts as a reference for the proofreaders, because Roman numerals are so tricky; I didn’t want a reference to John XI to slip through as “John IX” or anything. The idea was to strike out the surnames when the regnal numbers were confirmed.   

But then in the publication process it occurred to us all that this fuller form ensures that the reader will know exactly which pope is indicated.  It is a great help in following references, and retrieving more information. 

It also has the additional benefit of carrying historical and political connotations, too, by linking the popes to their genealogical context, and giving credit where it’s due. You wouldn’t want Alexander VII referred to as “Alexander VI”, but “Alexander VII Chigi” and “Alexander VI Borgia” keeps things abundantly clear. But mostly it’s to guarantee that the reference is correct in print. 

It’s now standard form at Pangaeus Press.

So is it now proper to refer to Pope Mecurius rather than calling him Pope John II?

(For those who don’t know the history, this is the first time a pope changed his name upon election.  He was born a pagan, hence being named after the Roman god Mercury.  He didn’t think it was good form to have the Vicar of Christ bearing the name of a pagan god.)

The form here would be “John II Mercurius”, if any references to him came up.

But these comments prove our policy well advised.  Notice “references to Pope Pacelli (Pius XI).”  Nope! It’s got to be either “references to Pope Ratti (Pius XI)” or “references to Pope Pacelli (Pius XII).”

And as a Roman numeral is infinitely more likely to fall victim to a typographical error than a surname, we’re better off with the form “regnal name, regnal numeral, surname”!

As an American studying in Rome, i had much the same experience. At first it just sounded unusual, but on reflection, especially seeing it used respectfully, it does make sense. The regnal name has a long history, and can be a powerful symbol, but the name given at baptism is tied to a sacrament and therefore can never be replaced - and as everyone knows popes for centuries retained their baptismal name in office.

Pope Benedict XVI never ceased to be Joseph Ratzinger, the well-known theologian, and has continued even to publish under his own name (what publishers and marketers do with the title page is another matter).

In fact, it seems profoundly appropriate for the champion of a hermenuetic of continuity to be refered to as “Pope Ratzinger”, lest we think his papacy is discontinuous with his theological and ecclesiastical prior life!

Here in MA, we call the priest Father (last name). Same with popes, bishops, cardinals, saints, angels, etc.
However, with all due respect, when it comes to PRIVATE devotions and prayers (i.e. Archbishop Fulton Sheen), at least for me, all the “official” rules goes out the window…and the door.
God knows whom I’m talking about and to, and I suspect all those in Heaven know too.

In reality, it’s not any stranger to say “Pope Wojtyla” than it is to say “Archbishop Dolan.” Except that Americans just don’t use that for the Pope so it sounds weird.

However, when you say it in Italian, the intimacy of the word “Papa” (which reminds us that the Pope is our spiritual father), gives it a most delightful sound. That’s why I often call John Paul I “Papa Luciani” (I have a great devotion to him; yesterday was the 33rd anniversary of his death).

If I remember right, Germans say something like “Der Wojtyla-Papst,” “Der Ratzinger-Papst.”  meaning “The Ratzinger Pope.”

Now THAT’S weird.

Well actually it was the day after the anniversary when I started typing. When I hit send it was after midnight, so it’s two days ago now. . . does that make any sense?

Only in death will we have our own names since only in death are we no longer part of the effort. In death we become heroes. His name was Robert Paulson.

For the most part, if the Pope himself doesn’t consider it to be an insult, I wouldn’t see a problem with it.

However, I have noticed that many on the American side snidely refer to Pope Benedict as Pope Ratzinger, or more commonly just “Ratzinger”. A lot depends on the intent of the person who is referring to the Pope. Some people in other countries have been taught that regnal names are not always to be used, or are to be used in one occasion but not another.

Its funny to note, however, that the anti-theist trolls never call the other Popes (JPII, John 23, etc) by their given names. Maybe its because 1)Wojtyla is a pain to say for us non-Polish or B) The name Ratzinger sounds like rat and lends itself well to men acting like little boys on the playground?

In the right context, I think that referring to Popes as Pope Whathisface or Pope Formalface is okay- but always in the right context. Truly disrespectful would be to refer to him as Mr. I’mtryingtomakeastupidpoint just as it is disrespectful to refer to an officer or a judge by their given names.

In Spain, only the enemies of the Church would usually say Wojtyla, etc. when referring to a Pope (except when you are talking about the Pope before he was a Pope, eg ‘as Card. Ratzinger taught in 1995…’).

Why not just call His Holiness “His Holiness” or “the Holy Father”? Nobody calls Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, “Queen Windsor”.